SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 31777

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
S.Sivakumar – Appellant
Versus
THE TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No. 9649 of 2026 and WMP Nos.10400, 10401 & 10402 OF 2026, 1. S.Sivakumar

2. N.Meenakshi Petitioner(s)

Vs The Tamil Nadu Housing Board Rep by the Executive Engineer cum administrative officer Nandanam Division No.485,MTB building Nandanam Chennai-600 035 Respondent(s) PRAYE R : Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, calling for the records of the order passed by the respondent in Letters bearing Letter No.N.T.R.11/001654/2021 dated 16.8.2024 and quash the same and direct the respondent Board to pay appropriate compensation by way of interest at such rate as may determined by this Honble court for the delay in handling over possession of HIG Flat No.10B (10th floor) to the petitioner calculated from the agreed date of handing over possession For Petitioner(s): Ms.T.Hemalatha For Respondent: Mr.D.Veerasekaran

ORDER

WMP.No.10401 of 2026 has been filed to permit the petitioner to file a single writ petition. This petition is ordered on payment of separate court fee.

2. The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the demand notice dated 16.8.2024 and direct the respondent Board to pay appropriate compensation by way of interest at such rate as may determined by this court for the delay in handing over possession of HIG Flat No.10B(10th floor) to the petitioners calculated from the agreed date of handing over possession.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board launched a project for construction of 102 premium High income group flats in Turn Bulls Tower, a new residential development under self financing scheme located near GK Moopanar Flyover, Nandanam, Chennai. The proposed flat ranged in size from 1392 to 1541 sq. ft. across 17 floors. The respondent board issued an advertisement inviting online application during the period from 14.09.2021 and 13.12.2021 for the above project and the successful applicant would be selected by lottery and requested to pay initial and subsequent instalment totally between 137.70 lakhs to 152.25 lakhs by December 2022 for ownership of the flats. The due date of the completion of the flat was promised as December 2022. In respect of the above project, the respondent TNHB obtained planning permission from CMDA vide P.P.No.13288 dated 22.07.2021. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board also obtained approval from the Real Estate Regulatory Authority viz., RERA vide approval dated 28.09.2021.

4. It is the further case of the petitioners that initial deposit (5%) was to be paid along with application by Demand Draft and the selected applicant was required to pay another 5% of the amount within 21 days from the date of receipt of the allotment order. Balance 90% payment was to be remitted by instalments. The petitioners have submitted their applications on 29.11.2021 to the respondent and the same was registered. The petitioners have received a communication dated 27.01.2022 from the respondent confirming that the petitioners have been allotted the above flats and the final cost of the flat is Rs.1,45,54,000/- The petitioners remitted all instalment payments on time and construction of flat was also completed by April 2024. By a subsequent communication, the petitioners were called upon to come and collect key handing over letter based on the completion certificate issued by CMDA in April 2024. Thereafter, the key handing over letter was also issued wherein there was no reference to any outstanding payment including any GST demand. All of a sudden, by letter dated 16.08.2024, the petitioners were called upon to remit another amount to the tune of 5% of the total cost towards GST allegedly payable by the petitioners. It is the contention of the petitioners that the notice of the board at the time of launching of the project itself it was clearly stated that the sale price is inclusive of GST. The said demand notice is totally untenable. Challenging the said de

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top