In a significant ruling, Justice R MT Teekaa Raman of the Madras High Court has passed an order directing the Chennai Hiranandani Residents' Welfare Association to pay a total sum of Rs1.19 lakh to the promoter, Hiranandani Developers Private Limited. The association has been held responsible for causing both inconvenience and pecuniary loss to the developer. This ruling comes as a result of the association's suppression of information, which has negatively impacted the developer's interests. The court's decision aims to ensure accountability and compensation for the harm caused by the association's actions.
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has imposed a penalty of Rs 500 on each of the 239 members belonging to the Chennai Hiranandani Residents Welfare Association. The court found them guilty of suppressing crucial facts and attempting to hinder the construction of new residential buildings by Hiranandani Developers Private Limited, the project's promoter. Justice R M T Teekaa Raman delivered the verdict, ordering the association to pay a total cost of Rs 1.19 lakh to the developer for causing inconvenience and financial loss.
The dispute stemmed from the development of the House of Hiranandani township project in Chennai, covering an expansive 120-acre area in Egattur village. Initially, the promoter had constructed 14 towers and two clubhouses, one for each phase, as part of the project's initial phases. However, despite completing Phase I, which included seven towers and an operational clubhouse, no progress had been made in constructing the Phase II clubhouse. Instead, the developer began constructing two residential buildings in the designated Phase II clubhouse location, as alleged by the residents' welfare association.
The association argued that such a change in land use was impermissible as per the approved plan, emphasizing that any modifications to the plan approval required the unanimous consent of all co-owners. Additionally, they claimed that once the apartments were sold, it was not permissible to retract a common facility like the clubhouse. In response, the developer denied the allegations, asserting that the second clubhouse was under construction and would be completed in due course. To support their claim, they submitted photographs as evidence.
The developer further accused the petitioner association of concealing material facts to obtain an interim court order and impede construction. They presented copies of the exchanged notices, revealing the association's demand for the waiver of non-active membership charges and free membership to certain amenities. The developer argued that the current plea was merely an attempt to coerce approval of their requests.
Agreeing with the developer's arguments, Justice Teekka Raman dismissed the association's plea and imposed the penalty. Moreover, the court lifted the interim stay that had previously halted construction activities by the developer.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
