While considering a property dispute matter, the Madras High Court has held that the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority cannot decide disputed questions of title and the litigant has to approach the competent Civil Court.

The High Court was considering a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashing of an order passed by the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

The Single Bench of Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy held, “With the said mandatory requirement in existence, if, prima facie, TNRERA is of view that the project proponent on the face of it does not qualify as somebody who is having title or that the nature of encumbrance is such that the registration cannot be granted, it may, in a given fact situation, reject the registration also. However, it must be seen that when there are disputed questions of title, it is not for the TNRERA to go into the same and decide the issue itself. It is for the persons to approach the competent Civil Court. In this case, when the Civil Court has found a prima facie case in favour of the second respondent and when the injunction is operating against the petitioner, this case does not present the situation where TNRERA is required to consider rejecting the registration.

Senior Counsel G.Rajagopalan represented the Petitioner while Senior Counsel T.V. Ramanujam represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The petitioner claimed that he is the owner of the property in Thiruneermalai village and the property had been purchased by his father. The petitioner secured electricity, gas and telephone connections in the above address. While so, the second respondent filed a suit seeking for a permanent injunction against the petitioner from interfering with the property. An order of interim injunction was also granted. However, the petitioner already filed a counter and the matter has been kept pending for more than three years. According to the petition, taking advantage of the ex parte interim injunction order, the second respondent had applied for registration of a project of developing the said property.

The petitioner made an objection to the Chairperson, Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TNRERA), objecting to the grant of registration to the said project. Earlier, when the petitioner applied under the Right to Information Act, he was informed that no such registration had been granted. However, subsequently, the petitioner came to know that registration was granted in favour of the second respondent.

Arguments

The second respondent resisted the petition on the ground that, being the owner of the property, he wants to develop the property and after obtaining due permission, has registered the project with the TNRERA under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and thus the authority cannot go into the question raised by the petitioner.

Reasoning

The Bench referred to Section 4 (2) (l) of the Act, which stated that a declaration has to be made by the promoter with reference to the facts that he has got any legal title to the land and that the land is free from all encumbrances, etc.

The Bench clarified that the TNRERA cannot decide the issue of disputed questions of title and it is for the persons to approach the competent Civil Court. The Bench held that when the Civil Court had found a prima facie case in favour of the second respondent and when the injunction was operating against the petitioner, TNRERA was not required to consider rejecting the registration.

“Mere grant of registration by the TNRERA will not prejudice the petitioner in any manner in canvassing its plea before the Civil Court or making even a counter-claim or filing even a suit as against the second respondent”, it added.

Noting that in all the earlier proceedings, the petitioner had been relegated to the Civil Court, the Bench stated that it would be open for the petitioner, even with reference to the proceedings of the project or construction, to file a counter petition in the same pending suit or file separate civil proceedings and contest the issue. “...it may not be open for the TNRERA to revoke the registration already granted and reconsider the issue. It must be noted that the project is registered and the construction is in an advanced stage”, it added.

The Bench disposed of the petition by keeping open the liberty of the petitioner to approach the Civil Court.

Cause Title: N.Balakrishnan v. Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Neutral Citation: 2026:MHC:3769)

Appearance

Petitioner: Senior Counsel G.Rajagopalan, M/s. G.R.Associates

Respondent: Senior Counsel T.V. Ramanujam, Advocates Amirtapoonkodi Dinakaran, R. Ramya

Click here to read/download Order


Tags: