The Madras High Court has declined to interfere with a project registration granted by the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TNRERA), holding that disputed questions of property title must be decided by a competent civil court.
Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy passed the order on September 9, 2026, in a writ petition filed by N. Balakrishnan challenging TNRERA’s registration of a real estate project.
Background of the Case
The petitioner claimed rights over property in S.No.314/17B in Thiruneermalai village, Tambaram taluk, stating that it had been purchased by his father and later inherited by him. A civil suit concerning the property was already pending before the District Munsif Court, Pallavaram.
According to the petitioner, despite his objection to the proposed project registration, TNRERA subsequently registered the project on April 10, 2026. He also alleged that his objection had later been misplaced by the authority.
The second respondent, however, maintained that he was the owner of the property and that various authorities had already directed the petitioner to approach the civil court regarding the title dispute.
Court’s Observation
The High Court examined the requirements under Section 4(2)(l) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which requires a promoter to declare legal title to the land and disclose relevant encumbrances.
The Court clarified that while TNRERA can examine whether statutory requirements for registration are satisfied, it cannot itself decide disputed questions of title that properly fall within the jurisdiction of a civil court.
The Court observed:
“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.”
The Court also noted that the civil court had found a prima facie case in favour of the second respondent and that an injunction was operating against the petitioner. It therefore held that the case did not require TNRERA to reject the project registration.
Decision
The High Court found no merit in the writ petition and disposed of it while keeping open the petitioner’s liberty to pursue appropriate proceedings before the civil court. The Court also clarified that the project’s registration would not prevent the petitioner from pursuing his claims concerning the property before the competent court.
There was no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
