HIRANANDANI AMALFI OWNERS ASSOCIATION v. THE DIRECTOR
Court: Madras High Court
Bench: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Judgment date:
Case summary
Madras High Court judgment dated 2025-12-18. HIRANANDANI AMALFI OWNERS ASSOCIATION v. THE DIRECTOR. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
WP No. 49635 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-12-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR WP No. 49635 of 2025 AND WMP NO. 55480 OF 2025 Hiranandani Amalfi Owners Association, Rep. By its Secretary Anbazhagan M, Amalfi, House Of Hiranandani, 5/63, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Egattur, Chennai-600 130. Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Director, Tamil Nadu Fire And Rescue Services, No. 17, Reukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 088. 2. M/s. Hiranandani Realtors Pvt. Ltd. , Rep. By Its Director, 2nd Floor, Olympia, Central Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Powai, Mumbai-400 076. Also At House Of Hiranandani, 5/63, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Egattur, Chennai-600 130. Respondent(s) PRAYER:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, st praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 respondent to consider the representation dated 16. 09.
2025 issued by the petitioner st st Association to the 1 respondent requesting the 1 respondent to initiate action nd st on the 2 respondent and to rectify the defects listed in the 1 respondent’s reports bearing. https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis WP No. 49635 of 2025 For Petitioner(s): Mr. Rohan Rajasekaran For Respondent: Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader ORDER st This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to direct the 1 respondent to consider the representation dated 16. 09. 2025 issued by the st st petitioner Association to the 1 respondent requesting the 1 respondent to nd st initiate action on the 2 respondent and to rectify the defects listed in the 1 respondent’s reports. 2. Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader takes st notice on behalf of the 1 respondent. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the resident of the nd petitioner Association purchased the flats from the 2 respondent and it was nd nd agreed between the 2 respondent and the allottees that the 2 respondent would mandatorily maintain the affairs of the apartment for a period of 18 nd months. Towards the end of said mandatory maintenance period, the 2 respondent had handed over only few necessary documents pertaining to the apartment. The petitioner Association requested for the renewed Fire License nd for the year 2021-22. However, the same was not handed over by the 2 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis WP No. 49635 of 2025 respondent and there was also several discrepancies with respect to the car parking allotment and reimbursement of the Corpus fund. Therefore, the petitioner Association filed a complaint before the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the said compliant was also allowed on 22. 12.
2022, nd directing the 2 respondent to handover the necessary documents to the nd petitioner Association. Though the 2 respondent preferred an appeal against the order dated 22. 12. 2022, the same got dismissed and the second appeal nd preferred by the 2 respondent is pending. 4. Further, he would submit that between the year 2022 and 2024, the petitioner Association tried to renew the fire license. However, during the st renewal inspection conducted by the 1 respondent, they found several lacunae and did not renew the same. Despite several requests made by the petitioner nd Association, the 2 respondent has never come forward to rectify the technical nd defects and even the fire license stands in the name of the 2 respondent, who has not taken any steps to transfer the same in the name of the petitioner st Association. Since the defects pointed out by the 1 respondent is not rectified , st the 1 respondent keep on rejecting the application for renewal of fire license.
st Therefore, the petitioner Association gave a representation to the 1 respondent nd to initiate action against the 2 respondent. Since the same was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed. https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis WP No. 49635 of 2025 st 5. At the outset, this Court is of the view that the 1 respondent is only the nd licensing Authority, who cannot take action against the 2 respondent for the defects in the construction of the apartment. The petitioner Association has to st workout their remedy by rectifying the defects pointed out by the 1 respondent nd for obtaining the fire license and the 2 respondent can be sued in the manner known to the law for the loss sustained by the petitioner Association. Thus, the present writ petition is devoid of merits. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18-12-2025 rst Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis WP No. 49635 of 2025 To 1. The Director Tamil Nadu Fire And Rescue Services, No. 17, Reukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 088. 2. M/s. Hiranandani Realtors Pvt. Ltd. , Rep. By Its Director, 2nd Floor, Olympia, Central Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Powai, Mumbai-400 076. Also At House Of Hiranandani, 5/63, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Egattur, Chennai-600 130. https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis WP No. 49635 of 2025 N. SATHISH KUMAR J. rst WP No. 49635 of 2025 AND WMP NO. 55480 OF 2025 18-12-2025 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.