Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Cause of Action as a Continuing One - Main Points and Insights
The question of whether the cause of action for non-conveyance of undivided share of land by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board is a continuing one depends on the nature of the legal issues involved. Some judgments suggest that certain actions, such as illegal constructions or conversions of open spaces, constitute continuing wrongs, making the cause of action ongoing ["Tmt.M.Iniya vs Xavier Britto - Madras"]. Conversely, other rulings indicate that once possession or ownership is settled, subsequent claims may not constitute a continuing cause of action ["Concrete Constructions Represented by its Sole Proprietor V. Prakashlal VS R. Subramaniam - Madras"].
Several sources clarify that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board's ownership of land is often vested through acquisition or conveyance, and that their authority over undivided shares is limited within the boundaries of the land allocated or sold ["Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748"], ["K. V. Srinivasan, Represented by his Power of Attorney, S. Srividhya VS State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Housing & Urban Development, Chennai - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 971"]. When the Board fails to convey undivided shares after sale, the legal challenge may be viewed as a continuing cause, especially if illegal constructions or encroachments persist ["Tmt.M.Iniya vs Xavier Britto - Madras"].
The legal principle of a 'continuing wrong' is also applied in cases involving illegal constructions or illegal conversions of open spaces, which can justify ongoing claims or demands for demolition or conveyance ["Tmt.M.Iniya vs Xavier Britto - Madras"]. However, for claims related to the initial sale or conveyance of undivided shares, once the transaction is complete and possession is handed over, the cause of action may not be deemed continuing unless illegal acts or breaches are ongoing ["Concrete Constructions Represented by its Sole Proprietor V. Prakashlal VS R. Subramaniam - Madras"].
Analysis and Conclusion
The cause of action regarding the Tamil Nadu Housing Board's failure to convey undivided shares may be considered continuing if the issue involves ongoing illegal acts, such as illegal constructions or encroachments, or if the Board's obligation to convey remains unfulfilled over time. In such cases, courts have recognized the right to seek relief repeatedly as the wrongful act persists ["Tmt.M.Iniya vs Xavier Britto - Madras"].
However, if the dispute pertains solely to the initial sale and transfer of undivided shares, and there are no ongoing breaches or illegal acts, the cause of action is likely to be viewed as non-continuing, with the limitation period starting from the date of the original transaction ["Concrete Constructions Represented by its Sole Proprietor V. Prakashlal VS R. Subramaniam - Madras"].
References:
["Tmt.M.Iniya vs Xavier Britto - Madras"]: Explains the principle of a continuing wrong under Tamil Nadu law, applicable in cases of illegal construction or illegal conversion of open spaces, allowing for ongoing relief such as demolition.
["Concrete Constructions Represented by its Sole Proprietor V. Prakashlal VS R. Subramaniam - Madras"]: Discusses that the cause of action for conveyance or sale of undivided share is not continuous once the sale is completed and possession is handed over, unless ongoing illegal acts are involved.
["Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748"]: Clarifies that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board's ownership is often limited to the boundaries of the land sold, and failure to convey undivided shares could give rise to legal claims, potentially as a continuing cause if illegalities persist.
["K. V. Srinivasan, Represented by his Power of Attorney, S. Srividhya VS State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Housing & Urban Development, Chennai - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 971"]: States that ownership vested with the Board since land acquisition, but issues of non-conveyance or illegal encroachments may sustain a continuing cause of action if acts are ongoing.
Summary:The cause of action for non-conveyance of undivided land shares by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board can be considered continuing if illegal acts or breaches persist, such as illegal construction or encroachment. Once the sale and possession are complete, and no illegal acts are ongoing, the cause of action generally ceases to be continuing.
Purchasing a flat from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB) is a dream for many in Chennai and beyond. But what happens when the sale deed doesn't explicitly mention the undivided share (UDS) of the land? Does this omission mean TNHB has failed to convey the land interest, giving rise to a continuing cause of action for purchasers? This is a common concern for flat owners, especially when planning reconstructions or facing title disputes.
In this post, we explore the legal position based on statutes, sale deed covenants, and key court judgments. Generally, under the Tamil Nadu Apartment Ownership Act, 1994 (TNAOA), and related rules, the undivided interest in land and common areas is deemed conveyed upon execution of the sale deed—even if not expressly stated. This typically eliminates any ongoing failure to convey, shifting focus to buyer protections and limitations. Let's break it down.
The question arises: Tamil Nadu Housing Board not conveying undivided share of land to purchaser, whether the cause of action is a continuing one?
Courts have clarified that no express conveyance is needed. A Full Bench ruling emphasizes: the reading of the various provisions of the Tamil Nadu Apartment Ownership Act, 1994, the covenants in the sale deed... will amply establish that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board having not retained any right over the land appurtenant to the flats or common area, the question of obtaining 'No Objection Certificate' from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board will not arise. Chennai Fruit Commission Agent''''s Association VS Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 2543
Key takeaway: The cause of action does not continue because the UDS vests automatically with the apartment. TNHB loses control post-sale, vesting management in owners or future cooperatives. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748Chennai Fruit Commission Agent''''s Association VS Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 2543
TNHB sale deeds include covenants stating the land underlying the flats vests in a future Housing Cooperative Society: That the Vendor... agrees to vest the land on which the Building consisting of the flat... is contained to a Housing Co-operative Society as and when such a Society is formed by the owners of all the flats and it is hereby agreed... that such Cooperative Society shall held the land jointly on behalf of all its members to protect their rights and privileges. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748
Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Apartment Ownership Rules, 1997, reinforces this: the undivided interest in the general and / or restricted common areas and facilities shall not be separated from the apartment to which it appertains and shall be deemed conveyed or encumbered with the apartment even though such interest is not expressly mentioned or described in the conveyance or other instrument. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748Chennai Fruit Commission Agent''''s Association VS Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 2543
This statutory deeming provision means subsequent purchasers inherit full rights. TNHB retains no rights over the land, common areas, or garages/parking, which form part of the UDS. Restrictions on use by TNHB are typically void. P. Sivanesan VS Tamil Nadu Housing Board - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 4173
Flat owners often seek TNHB No Objection Certificates (NOCs) for demolishing and rebuilding. However, TNHB NOCs come with disclaimers: planning permission from CMDA/Corporation required; TNHB confirms no objection if within undivided share boundaries per DCR; no responsibility for allottee disputes or title issues. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748
Courts hold: as long as the construction are made within the boundary of the undivided share of land pertaining to the block... the Tamil Nadu Housing Board will have no say over the matter. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748 Even additional units sold post-reconstruction yield no TNHB claim: Even if additional dwelling units are constructed and sold to the third parties, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board cannot lay any claim over such additional construction. As long as the construction are within the parameters of the Rules of the CMDA... the Tamil Nadu Housing Board have got not say. Chennai Fruit Commission Agent''''s Association VS Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 2543
Approach Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) directly for approvals—comply with Development Control Regulations (DCR) and boundaries.
Courts prioritize innocent buyers' possession. In one case, TNHB's actions contributed to title confusion, allowing 54 flat buyers to retain possession despite claims for additional flats. T. Udaykumar VS Ravichandran - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 655
TNHB, established under the Tamil Nadu Housing Board Act, 1961, aims to provide housing stocks but disclaims pre-sale title disputes. Original allottees and buyers resolve privately. M/s. Aanandham Flat owners A vs The principal Secretary - 2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 17868
While UDS is generally deemed conveyed, caveats apply:
Acquisition Disputes: Subsequent buyers on TNHB-acquired land lack locus to challenge under the new Land Acquisition Act if awards passed and possession taken; sales void without TNHB NOC. Principle of caveat emptor—verify titles beyond revenue records/CMDA permissions. R. Janarthanam VS State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development, Fort St. George, Chennai - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 433K. V. Srinivasan, Represented by his Power of Attorney, S. Srividhya VS State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Housing & Urban Development, Chennai - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 971 A decree lacking jurisdiction is a nullity; possession on acquired land unprotected. Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Tiruchirappalli VS Saroja (Died) - 2023 Supreme(Mad) 2348
Reconveyance Issues: In land acquisition cases, if land vests with TNHB post-award, original owners can't dictate usage. Re-conveyance under Section 48B may apply if unutilized, but not retrospectively. D. Balaraman VS Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 2021 Supreme(Mad) 3399Gowri Shanmugasundaram VS Atulya Mishra - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 3440Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board Nandanam Anna Salai VS Kochu Seetha Jayaraman - 2017 Supreme(Mad) 3966Commissioner, Ambattur Municipality, Ambattur, Chennai VS Government of Tamil Nadu - 2015 Supreme(Mad) 2010 For instance, courts remand for Government decisions under Section 48B where land lies vacant, but delay/laches bar stale claims. Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act doesn't revive dead litigation. Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board Nandanam Anna Salai VS Kochu Seetha Jayaraman - 2017 Supreme(Mad) 3966
Boundary and Compliance: Reconstructions must stay within UDS without affecting neighbors; CMDA approval mandatory. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748
Pending payments, TNHB may hold first charge over UDS. K.Sumathi vs The Government of Tamil Nadu - 2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 19133
To safeguard rights:- Form cooperative societies post-purchase to manage land/common areas.- Verify encumbrance certificates, revenue records, patta, and prior TNHB NOCs.- For reconstruction: Secure CMDA permissions; ignore TNHB if compliant.- In disputes: File civil suits or writs citing TNAOA deeming provisions—TNHB can't evict unilaterally.
TNHB letters may specify UDS extents, aiding clarity. S.ARUNKUMAR Vs THE DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION
Generally, TNHB's omission of express UDS conveyance doesn't create a continuing cause of action—it's deemed transferred under law. Flat owners hold robust rights for possession, management, and reconstruction, subject to CMDA compliance and due diligence.
Key Takeaways:- UDS vests automatically via sale deed and Rule 17. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748Chennai Fruit Commission Agent''''s Association VS Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 2543- No TNHB NOC needed post-sale for boundary-compliant works.- Beware acquisition pitfalls; verify titles thoroughly.
This is general information based on reported cases and statutes, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
References:1. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Chennai VS Mary Rani Immanual - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1748: TNHB NOC, sale covenants, Rule 17.2. Chennai Fruit Commission Agent''''s Association VS Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority - 2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 2543: Full Bench on no NOC needed.3. T. Udaykumar VS Ravichandran - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 655: Buyer possession protection.4. P. Sivanesan VS Tamil Nadu Housing Board - 2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 4173: Garages as UDS.
#TNHBRights, #UndividedShare, #TamilNaduHousingLaw
Therefore, according to him, the land do not vest with the Tamil Nadu Housing Board after the same is sold in favour of the allottees. ... to any cause of action relating to the common areas and facilities and the limited common areas and facilities of more than one apartment." ... It also made it very clear that as long as the construction are made within the boundary of the undivided share of #H....
In the Judgment reported in 2013-2-L.W.685 [THE TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD vs. ... Whether the garage space forms part of the undivided share of land sold to the residents and intended for their use? ... 2. Whether the respondents are entitled to impose any restriction in the sale deed and retain ownership over a portion of undivided share of land ? ... TAMIL #HL_....
Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act on the principle of continuous wrong. In such event, any person, whether directly affected by such illegal construction or not, is entitled to the relief of mandatory injunction of demolition. ... The learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs relied on the reported ruling in 2008 (3) CTC 405 in the case of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and others vs.
(h)To sum up, the respondent-Board is a statutory board, established under an Act of State Legislature viz., Tamil Nadu Housing Board Act, 1961, was formed for the purpose of providing housing stocks for the benefit ... 2.The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board 9th Floor, CMDA Building Koyambedu, Chennai. ... The point in issue is whether the TNHB can separately charge f....
Thereafter, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board occupied the property for the said purpose. The petitioner had purchased undivided share to an extent of 1175 sq.ft. under a registered sale deed dated 02.02.2009. ... same has been purchased and the said undivided share of land has been registered vide Deed of sale in the office of the SRO, Tambaram from one Mr.V.Chandrasekaran. ... It is amounting to "Volenti non fit injur....
Further, the defendant having made a counter claim, cannot contend that there is no continuing cause of action through tripartite agreement. ... Rs.23,51,350/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty only) shall be payable after executing the sale deed of undivided share of land in favour of the purchaser/s and before taking the possession of the Flat. ... 7. ... Shall be entitled to 35% of the constructed area of the pr....
Pending such payment, there shall be first charge over the undivided share (UDS) in land in favour of the third respondent Tamil Nadu Housing Board. ... The promoters sold undivided share in the land to the petitioners and others. ... I humbly submit that Tamil Nadu Housing Board provides affordable housing to various sections....
On the other hand, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board on the same day of application of one V.Prabhakararaja, issued a letter stating that flat No.11-B is with 1664 sq.ft of undivided share. ... Nadu Housing Board, Chennai in nf/nf/e/nfh-ep/mgp-1097- 2017 to V.Prabhakararaja informing that the undivided share in the land in respect of flat No.11-B i....
Action is being taken to remove the existing structures on the Tamil Nadu Housing Board land as per the Board's Resolution No.8.06, dated 27.02.2012. ... The ownership and possession of the land is vested with the Tamil Nadu Housing Board ever since. ... The possession had been taken by the Land Acquisition Officer, who in turn handed over the acquired land to t....
There is no decree as against the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and therefore, the land having vested with the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the decree cannot be executed as against the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. 6. ... He had further contended that the defendants in the suit have not been arrayed in their individual capacity, but only in their official ....
The affidavit further says that the land in Survey No.95/8 measuring to an extent of 9 cents to be re-conveyed as per the Government Order after collecting the development charges of Rs.8,00,000/- along with further interest. Therefore, as we have indicated above, when a similar extent of land belonging to one Kannappan was acquired and the same was also handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and after taking physical possession of the land and transferring the land to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the Tamil Nadu Government, accepting the appeal of the said Kannappan has direc....
5. Again writ petition has been filed in W.P. No. 35066/2002. In the circumstances, it has been informed that since the land acquired by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, for which you are seeking re-conveyance, is situated in the centre of Chennai and hence, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board needs time to implement a proper scheme in a manner to be beneficial to the public. The learned Single Judge by order dated 27.1.2006 dismissed the writ petition holding that the Government cannot exercise power under Section 48B of the Act. According to Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act....
Since the land is under the ownership and possession of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The learned Single Judge was not having the benefit of the award file and therefore, the case pleaded by the first respondent was accepted without any kind of corroboration. Respondents 1 and 4 to 6 have no justifiable claim in the matter.
Thus, the reading of the various provisions of the Tamil Nadu Apartment Ownership Act, 1994, the covenants in the sale deed executed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board in favour of the allot tees will amply establish that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board having not retained any right over the land appurtenant to the flats or common area, the question of obtaining “No Objection Certificate” from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board will not arise. Even if additional dwelling units are constructed and sold to the third parties, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board cannot lay any claim over such add....
It is his contention that once the land is vested with the State, the original owners cannot have concern on the usage of the land and that if the acquired land had already been transferred to other agency, the Government cannot exercise power under Section 48-B of the Act and re-convey the same to the original owner. Since then, possession of the said lands is with Tamil Nadu Housing Board. He would submit that in the present case, though the Advocate Commissioner evidences the availability of vacant land, nowhere it whispers about the accuracy of an extent of plots availa....
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
