Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J.NISHA BANU, R.KALAIMATHI
Vishnukumar Balasubramanian – Appellant
Versus
CASA Granda Builder Private Limited Rep by its Managing Director – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the appeal and claims (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. regulatory authorities' decisions and agreements (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. delay in possession and grounds for refund (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. violation of section 13 of rera and effect on agreement (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. occupancy certificate requirement (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. entitlement to refund and compensation (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
J. NISHA BANU, J.
The present Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Appellate Authority (TNRERAT) dated 07.08.2023.
2. The appellant herein filed a petition u/s 31 of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016 for refund of the amount paid towards the purchase of an Apartment with interest and cost, and the same was disposed of by the Appellate Authority by framing and answering the following 2 questions:-
(i) Whether the handing over of the flat is delayed warranting refund or not and what is the relevant date to decide the issue of delay?
(ii) What are reliefs the complainant is entitled to?
wherein, the Regulatory Authority, answered the 1st issue that the project was handed over to the complainant within the mutual agreed da
Appellant entitled to refund due to unfair agreement and failure to meet delivery obligations as per the Real Estate Act.
Developers cannot enforce termination clauses to retain liquidated damages once they opted to accept undelivered payments according to the contract's discretion clause, establishing the binding natur....
Developers cannot concurrently invoke different remedies in an agreement regarding termination and compensation; once a choice is made, it binds subsequent actions.
The court established that a project with delays in completion falls under RERA's provisions, and mere local authority certifications do not suffice as valid completion certificates.
Refusal to condone delay in appeal under Real Estate Act is upheld absent evidence of procedural irregularity.
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting a fact, and the appellant failed to substantiate claims of double GST payment, leading to the upholding of the Tribunal's decision regarding the refund....
Delay of 5 years - There is a delay of more than 5 years in obtaining completion/ Occupancy Certificate from the promised date of delivery of possession, therefore the Complainant cannot be compelled....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
