Registration under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act is not mandatory when a project has received a completion certificate and is not intended for sale or long-term lease.

JUDGMENT :

(ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

This common order is passed disposing the writ appeal and connected writ petition since the questions that arise for resolution are one and the same, and they have thus been clubbed to be heard together. The facts involved also turn more or less on a similar factual matrix.

Facts in W.P.No.32506 of 2023 and submissions of Mr.Karunakaran:

2. First, the facts in W.P.No. 32506 of 2023 as set out by Mr.Karunakaran, appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be the owner of lands in several survey numbers in MMRD Road (Radial Road) in Zamin Pallavaram village (property / property in question). The Petitioner set about developing a commercial complex comprising triple basement floors, ground floor and ten floors comprising office space, food court, shops, waiting area space for GIS substation and other amenities for the purposes of IT/ITES companies, in two blocks.

3. The Member Secretary to the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA), arrayed as 3^rd Respondent in the writ petition, had issued a planning permit dated 03.10.2020 valid till 02.10.2025. Soon thereafter, the petitioner received a letter from the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TNRERA/Authority) putting the petitioner to notice that every promoter / individual / developer should apply to it seeking registration of their real estate projects, prior to marketing or alienating the plots.

4. Reference was made to Section 3 (1) and 4(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (Act) and Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (Rules). The petitioner was called upon to comply under threat of action under Section 59 (1) and 59(2) of the Act.

5. The petitioner responded stating that no alienation of the building was intended, notwithstanding which, TNRERA insisted on the registration, cautioning the petitioner not to market the project or alienate plots until such time the project was registered. The petitioner yet again reiterated that the project was developed using its own funds and that it did not intend to market or sell any part of the project.

6. It made clear its intention to only rent the built-up area to IT companies and that too after receipt of completion certification from CMDA. There was no response to the aforesaid communications leading the petitioner to believe that its stand had been accepted. By way of abundant caution, and having regard to the initial stand taken by the Authority, the petitioner approached the Authority for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) as CMDA insisted thereupon as a pre-condition for issuance of completion certificate (CC).

7. The Authority had issued a letter on 11.07.2023 acquiescing to the position that the project of the petitioner did not call for registration with it, as it had been informed that the building was not meant for sale or lease. Based on the same, CMDA issued a partial completion certificate on 31.08.2023.

8. While so and the petitioner was proceeding with the completion of the building, and raising monies using the same to fund its business activities, it came to know that the Authority had issued a direction to the Sub Registrar, Pallavaram (Sub Registrar) to desist from registering any documents relating to the petitioner's property.

9. On an enquiry made under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), the petitioner came to know that the Sub-Registrar had been called upon under impugned order dated 11.07.2023 not to register any sale / l