Corporate entities must apply directly for property allotments; claims based on fraudulent misrepresentation are barred under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act.

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent, namely, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board represented by its Chairman & Managing Director, to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 01.04.2024 and to direct the second and third respondents to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the third respondent, P.Rajamani, was working as a manager in the petitioner company, namely Gem Stone Beach Resort Private Limited, for a few years. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the second respondent herein, had allotted a flat bearing No. H.39/F1, Sea Shore Apartment, situated at Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai on 14.06.1995, vide its Allotment Order No. B6/10592.H/94 in the name of the third respondent on behalf of the petitioner company. The petitioner company had great trust over the third respondent, and it accepted the aforesaid allotment in the name of the third respondent. The petitioner company had paid all the instalments to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the second respondent, by way of cheques from the period 17.02.1999 to 13.05.2002 without any default. The third respondent, P.Rajamani, had appointed the Managing director of the petitioner company, namely S.R.Asaithambi, as his Power of Attorney Agent registered as document No. 1905/1996 dated 23.09.1996 on the file of the Joint I, Sub Registrar office, Saidapet. While so, the third respondent stopped reporting to the office, and despite the petitioner’s best efforts, the third respondent did not respond. Consequently, the petitioner company took steps to have the sale deed executed in its name. Legal notices and representations were sent, but the third respondent sent a false reply to the legal notice and a rejoinder was sent to him. It is under these circumstances that the petitioner company is approaching this Court with the aforesaid relief.

3. The case of the petitioner is resisted by the second respondent by filing a counter affidavit. The second respondent submitted that the Government vide G.O.2D No. 185 H&U D Department dated 30.03.1995 ordered the allotment of HIG Flats No. 39/F1 at Thiruvanmiyur extension in favour of the third respondent, namely P.Rajamani. Subsequently, Application No. 0694 was submitted on 23.05.1995, and the provisional allotment order was made on 14.06.1995. The firm cost was fixed at Rs.7,08,709/-with a condition to pay the initial deposit of Rs.3,08,309/- within 21 days from the date of receipt of the order. On 30.08.1995, the initial deposit was made, and therefore, a regular allotment order was issued on 11.09.1995 for the HIG Flat No. 39/F1 at Thiruvanmiyur extension for an extent of 93.75 square metres in favour of the third respondent, P. Rajamani. The same was issued with a condition to pay the remaining amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on monthly instalments of Rs.6,409/- for 13 years on or before the 15th of every month with 20% penal interest. The possession of the said flat was handed over to the third respondent, P.Rajamani, on 06.02.1996. The entire outstanding due for the said flat was paid by the third respondent, P.Rajamani, on 28.04.2006. Subsequently, the Besant Nagar Division of Tamil Nadu Housing Board had sent a periodic intimation letter dated 04.03.2011 and 15.07.2013 to the third respondent, P.Rajamani for execution the sale deed for the said flat on production of the original documents including application form, regular allotment order and payment receipts etc. The said third respondent sent two letters on 08.09.2014 and 03.08.2015 stating that the entire flat cost was paid on 28.04.2006, but challan for payment of Rs.1,74,842/-was not available with him and requested to execute the sale deed for the said flat in his favour. Again, on 09.08.2021, the Housing Board sent a letter to the third respondent, P.Rajamani to produce the original documents and execute the sale deed in respect of the said flat. Under these circumstances, the present writ petition i