RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR FLAT ALLOTTEES/OWNERS CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY Vs. TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the order of a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 919 of 1985 dated 1.7.1994 dismissing the writ petition. The writ petition was filed by the appellant herein which is a registered society under the Tamil Nadu Co -operative Societies Act 53 of 1961. Its registered number being XNC. 723 and its members consist of owners/allottees of Ramakrishna Nagar, L.I.G., and M.I.G. Flats numbering 78. The said society has an elected president, vice president, treasurer, secretary and four committee Members. The first respondent Board framed a scheme under the Madras City Improvement Act, 1950 for acquiring building site and erecting buildings thereon consisting of several flats and selling each such flat independently and separately and with that purpose constructed flats in R.K. Nagar (Brodies) Road Scheme now known as Ramakrishna Nagar Flats. The Ramakrishna Nagar Scheme comprised of about 73 grounds and 775 square feet. The details of the entire scheme and the break -up figures of the total area are as given hereunder:

(2.) In the said area, 78 flats were constructed of which 60 were M.I.G. flats and 18 were L.I.G. Flats, and besides these flats, garages were constructed and the Housing Board had its office building measuring about 3,325 sq.ft. According to the appellant, the entire area is treated as a single and separate unit and block and is enclosed by compound wall on all four sides. The respondent board while calculating, fixing, arriving and determining the price for each flat took into account and consideration not only built up area but also the entire open space of ground wherein there was no construction or buildings and also the compound wall which was put up at the request of society but cost recovered from allottees with the result that the entire area encompassed and surrounded by the compound walls belonged to the allottees/owners of these 78 flats. The first respondent board entered into a lease -cum -sale agreement with each of the allottees in respect of each of the 78 flats and have put them in possession and the allottees are admittedly in occupation and enjoyment of the same even today. Initially the board had retained possession of the office building measuring about 3,325 square feet as caretakers office. Most of the allottees have paid the entire amount and have obtained sale deeds also. The allottees formed themselves into a society and got it registered under the Madras Cooperative Societies Act with the idea of maintaining and managing the flats and for the welfare of the allottees. After the formation of the said Society the writ petitioner society were insisting on the handing over the office building also restrained by the 1st respondent herein as their caretakers office, so that they could have full, complete and absolute control of the entire area for the proper and effective management and control of the entire area and ultimately succeeded in getting possession of the said building. The records produced before us would show that the writ petitioner society took possession of the entire area on 20.10.1975. According to the appellant, the first respondent ceased to have control and management with effect from 1.12.1975 onwards. In fact, it is seen from the letter dated 26.11.1975, that the first respondent board directed its allottees viz., the writ petitioner herein is in full, absolute, complete and effective possession, control and management of the entire area unenclosed and encompassed by compound walls on all the sides and the entire area within and surrounded by the compound walls belong exclusively and jointly to the 78 flats owners who are all the members of the society and the 1st respondent had not retained any part or portion of it to itself. Therefore, the first respondent had no legal right to interfere with the control, possession and management of the said area and all that it would be entitled to, would be for the balance of consideration from the allottees who have not so far obtained final sale deeds in their favour. Apart from this, the first respondent board has no right to interfere with the writ petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the area. Further, the first respondent board has also by its letter dated 6.2.1976 intimated to the Madras Electricity System that the maintenance has been handed over to the society from 1.12.1975 onwards and that further Consumption from January, 1976 onwards may be sent to the society directly thereby, accepting, acknowledging and recognising writ petitioner's management and control of the entire area.

(3.) While so, the 2nd respondent Federation sought the permission of the appellant to instal milk booth inside the appellant's compound and the said request of the Federation was considered by the Annual General Body of the appellant society in its meeting on 8.8.1982 and the General Body by its unanimous resolution decided not to have any building in their premises for vending milk and this resolution was also communicated to the Federation on 10.8.1982.