CCP No.3 of 2024 dt.24.03.2025 Exparte CC

Page 1 of 18

BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER,
TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
HYDERABAD.
Dated, this, the 24th day of MARCH, 2025.
Present:- Sri Syed Lateef-ur Rahman,
Adjudicating Officer.
C.C.P.No.03/2024/TG RERA
Between:
1) Sri Suresh Reddy S/o Ram Reddy, Aged: 36 yrs, Occ: Pvt.
employee, Flat No.103, Maha Homes, Muthyam Block,
Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
2) Sri Mohammed Yakub S/o Chithe Saab, aged: 41 yrs,
Occ: Pvt. employee, Flat No.104, Maha Homes, Muthyam
Block, Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
3) Sri Chakala Rama Gurappa S/o Blala Gurappa, aged: 41 yrs,
Occ: Pvt.employee, Flat No.105, Maha Homes, Muthyam
Block, Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
4) Sri Ajeesh Kumar AP S/o Unni Krishnan aged: 45 yrs,
Occ: Pvt.employee, Flat No.204, Maha Homes, Muthyam Block,
Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
5) Sri Sahu Satish Kumar S/o Sahu Karunakar, aged: 36 yrs,
Occ: Pvt. employee, Flat No.301, Maha Homes, Muthyam
Block, Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
6) Sri Chinipilli Vasu Reddy S/o Chinipilli Venkat Reddy,
aged: 43 yrs, Occ: Business, Flat No.405, Maha Homes,
Muthyam Block, Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
7) Sri Borsu Satya Sagar S/o Venkata Raja Gopal, aged: 31 yrs,
Occ: Pvt.Employee, Flat No.501, Maha Homes, Muthyam
Block, Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
8) Sri Yalaka Nagender Yadav S/o Chenchu Nagaiah, aged: 36 yrs,
Occ: Pvt.employee, Flat No.503, Maha Homes, Muthyam Block,
Isnapur PO, Sanga Reddy District – 502307.
…Complainants.
And
1) M/s.Maha Homes, rep., by Santhosh Kumar Gundla & Rupali
Raul, Ofice at 501, Sridhityanilayam, Puppalaguda, Manikonda,
Ranga Reddy District 500 089.
2) Sri Gundla Santhosh Kumar S/ late Anand, Partner, M/s.Maha
Homes, aged: 44 yrs, Occ: Business R/o H.No.3-5-4, Indiranagar,
Ramanthapur, Amberpet, Hyderabad 500 013.
3) Smt.R.Rohini W/o Raul Ratnakar, rep., by her GPA holder,
aged: 62 yrs, Occ: Housewife, R/o H.No.13-1-13/2/35/C,
Mangalhat, Amamnagar, Hyderabad 500 006.
…Respondents.

---

This complaint came up for hearing before me on 24.02.2025 in the
presence of Sri A.Naveen Reddy and Sri K.Uday Kumar, Counsels for the
Complainants and Respondent Nos.1 to 3 remained ex parte; upon perusing
the material on record and on hearing argument of learned Counsel for the
complainants and having stood over for consideration till this day, the
following order is passed:
ORDER
Complainant Nos.1 to 8 filed present complaint under Section 31 of Real
Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’)
read with Section 71 of the Act against Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to award
compensation.
CASE OF THE COMPLAINANTS:

1.

The case of the complainants, as revealed from the complaint, is that

Respondent No.1 is a builder. Respondent No.2 is a partner of builder and
Respondent No.3 is GPA holder of Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2(a). Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are owners and possessors of open plots
bearing Nos.87, 87/part and 88 total admeasuring 1066 Sq.yards in
Sy.No.386 situated at Isnapur village, Patancheru Mandal, Sanga Reddy
District

having

purchased

vide

Sale

Deeds

bearing

Document

Nos.11192/2019, dt.11.03.2019 and 19588/2019, dt.02.05.2019.

The

respondents got permission from HMDA dt.31.01.2020 for construction of
stilt + 5 floors on an extent of 891.22 Sq.Meters. Later, the respondents
have

completed

dt.11.04.2022.

construction

and

obtained

Occupancy

Certificate

However, the respondents failed to get the Project MAHA

HOMES - MUTYAM registered with RERA authority.

---

2(b). It is stated that Respondent No.2 made a promise to the complainants
that the Project would be finished by 31.03.2021 during the process of
purchase of Flats, which they could not do.

As such, the Occupancy

Certificate was issued on 11.04.2022.
2(c). According to the complainants, the respondents did not make
construction as per HMDA approval. The material used was of low quality
leading to multiple cracks in walls within a year and damage to the floor and
slab. Respondent No.2 collected Rs.45,000/- (Rs.Forty Five Thousand only)
from the complainants promising to provide drinking water connection, but
failed to keep up the promise. He returned the said amount after a period of
two years. The respondents also failed to provide water purifier provision as
promised.
2(d). It is further pleaded that the respondents have constructed two Blocks
by name Maha Homes - Madhuram and Maha Home - Muthyam side by side.
The water tank constructed for Maha Homes Muthyam is next to Maha
Homes Madhuram septic tank and as a result of which, the water pollutes
and causes health problem.

The respondents also did not follow the

guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.168, dt.07.04.2012 with regard to Car parking.
Fire Safety protection has also not been provided as per TS Fire Service Act,
1999, which resulted in fire accident. The respondents also failed to provide
separate Transformer to Maha Home – Muthyam Block as per HMDA
approval. There is only one Transformer provided to Maha Homes –
Madhuram Block which is also to be used by Maha Home – Muthyam Block
and this was opposed by the owners of said two Blocks.

---

2(e). The complainants also plead with regard to failure of respondents
either in construction as per HMDA approval or providing facilities under
law. According to them, the respondents failed to provide all necessary
documents and also failed to clear dues of taxes and electricity charges. The
respondents have collected additional amount of Rs.6,000/- (Rs. Six
Thousand only) from each complainant for affecting mutation, but failed to
provide the same. They have also failed to lay B.T.roads as required. The
painting done to the Flats is with poor quality of painting material, which
totally vanished within six months. It is stated that construction was done
with poor quality of material including the construction of security room.
Plumbing and Electrical works have also been done with poor quality
material.
2(f).

Therefore,

the

complainants

pray

to

award

compensation

of

Rs.1,24,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore and Twenty Four Lakhs only) plus
compensation for delay in giving possession to the complainants under
different heads as under:
i)

ii)
iii)
iv)

v)

An amount of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rs.Forty Lakhs only) as
compensation for collecting amount as stated above and failed
to provide drinking water connection and for failure to provide
water purifier provision.
An amount of Rs.32,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs only)
as compensation for constructing water tank and septic tank
side by side causing water contamination and health issues.
An amount of Rs.4,00,000/-(Rs.Four Lakhs only) as
compensation for collecting amounts from the complainants to
affect mutation.
An amount of Rs.32,00,000/- (Rs. Thirty Two Lakhs only) as
compensation for deficiency in service, for using poor quality of
material, unfair trade practice and failure to provide separate
Transformer etc.
An amount of Rs.32,00,000/- (Rs.Thirty Two Lakhs only) as
compensation for mental agony and harassment.

---

vi)

An amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as
compensation towards legal expenses.

2(g). The complainants also sought directions to the respondents to allot
Car parking as per HMDA approval and G.O.Ms.No.168 dt.078.04.2012 and
further direction to fix fire extinguishers and to shift electric meter board
panel at a separate location to avoid future fire accident and in case of
failure to do so, to award compensation of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rs.Sixteen Lakhs
only).
3(a). After the complaint was numbered and made over to the Adjudicating
Officer, notices were issued to Respondent Nos.1 to 3 through Registered
Post with Acknowledgment Due and matter was posted on 22.07.2024.
Respondent Nos.1 to 3 did not appear and notices sent to them were
returned as “addressee left”. Since learned Counsel for the complainants
submitted that the respondents have appeared before the Authority in Form
“M” complaint, but they intentionally avoided to receive notices in this case
and that Form ‘M’ complaint is posted on 07.08.2024, fresh notices were
again ordered and the complainants were permitted to serve notices and file
proof of service and case was posted on 07.08.2024 at 3.00 PM.

On

07.08.2024 at 3.00 PM, Complainant No.6 representing other complainants,
was present and Mr.Santosh Kumar Gundla/Respondent No.2 appeared
and represented that he is representing Respondent No.1 M/s. Maha Homes
and Respondent No.1 Rupali Raul is his wife and R.Rohini/Respondent No.3
is his Aunt and further stated that he is representing them. As such, the
case was adjourned to 13.08.2024 for counters of Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

---

3(b). On 13.08.2024, the complainants have appeared, but Respondent
Nos.1 to 3 remained absent and there was no representation on their behalf.
As such, Respondent Nos.1 to 3 have been set ex parte and the case has
been adjourned for ex parte evidence on behalf of the complainants and
hearing.
4.

The complainants have filed evidence affidavit of Complainant No.5

and additional affidavit of Complainant No.5 and got marked Exs.A1 to A65
in support of their contentions.
5.

Heard learned Counsel for the complainants. Learned Counsel for the

complainants has also filed written arguments.
6.

Now the Point for consideration is Whether the complainants are

entitled for compensation and if so, for what amount?
POINT:
7(a). A reference to the case of the complainants as pleaded in complaint
has been made supra. A perusal of entire complaint and documents filed
does not reveal that subsequent to Agreement of Sale and Sale Deeds on
record, there is any contract or agreement between the complainants and
the respondents under which the respondents are under an obligation to do
further acts with regard to construction as pleaded in pleading.

Without

any such contract or agreement, it is not known as to how the complainants
can plead as alleged in the complaint that the respondents have failed to do
alleged acts mentioned in complaint and as such they are entitled for

---

compensation, especially when the Agreement of Sale and Sale Deeds do not
have such terms or do not create such an obligation on the respondents.
7(b). To put it more clear, it has to be noted that the relationship of parties
will come into existence by virtue of contract or agreement under law.
Unless any relation and obligation is created under a contract or agreement,
it cannot be established that such an obligation or contract or agreement is
violated by other party. The question of claiming damages or compensation
arises when an obligation is created and when such obligation is not
properly discharged. In the absence of any such obligation being violated or
not discharged, the question of pleading a case about such relation and then
obligation to discharge such relation much less claiming compensation may
not arise.
8.

Now coming to the case on hand, the complainants have filed evidence

affidavit and additional evidence affidavit of complainant No.5 and got
marked Exs.A1 to A65 in support of their contention.
9(a). Out of documentary evidence Exs.A1 to 65, the documents relevant to
consider the relationship between the parties and contract or agreement on
the subject are Exs.A6 to A9, A19, A23 and A63. Exs.A6 to A9, A19 and
A23 are registered sale deeds executed by the respondent No.3 in favour of
complainant Nos.1 to 4, 6 and 8 in respect of their respective semi finished
Flats and Ex.A63 is Agreement of Sale executed by the respondent No.2 in
favour of complainant No.8 in respect of his Flat with columns, beams and
roof.

---

9(b). First let us have a look at Ex.A63.

Ex.A63 is Agreement of Sale

executed by the respondent No.2 in favour of complainant No.8.

There are

no such Agreements of Sale executed by the respondents in favour of the
other complainants. A perusal of Ex.A63 shows that respondent No.2 has
agreed to sell Flat No.503 on 5th Floor with columns, beams and roof
admeasuring 770 Sq.feet of built up area including balconies, common area
and Car parking along with undivided share of land admeasuring 35.5
Sq.yards on Plot Nos.88 and 87/P and Sy.No.386 in building complex
known as Muthyam situated at Isnapur village, Patancheru Mandal, Ranga
Reddy District.
Similarly, Exs.A6 to A9, A19 and A23 are copies of Registered Sale
Deeds of various dates for sale of semi-finished Flats bearing Nos.103,104,
105, 204, 405 and 503 in favour of complainant Nos.1 to 4, 6 and 8
respectively executed by the respondent No.3.
9(c). Thus, the Agreement of Sale Ex.A63 is for sale of Flat No.503 with
columns, beams and roof with car parking and the Sale Deeds Exs.A6 to A9,
A19 and A23 are for sale of semi-finished Flats bearing Nos.103, 104, 105,
204, 405 and 503 as referred above.

In none of these documents, there are

any further terms and conditions creating obligation on the respondents to
attend such and such either in complete works or remaining works. It is not
the case of the complainants that beside said documents, there are any
other documents executed between them and the respondents creating or
fixing such and such responsibility on the respondents and as per such
documents, the respondents are under obligation to attend the work of

---

construction etc as pleaded and claimed by them. Therefore, especially in
the light of said documentary evidence between the parties and there being
no documents binding respondents for the works as alleged and pleaded in
the complaint coupled with observations made in Para 7(a) and7 (b) above, it
is very difficult to accept the contentions of the complainants that the
respondents have failed to attend the works of construction etc as pleaded
in complaint.
10(a). Learned Counsel for the Complainants strenuously contended that
the respondents had violated the provisions of the Act by not getting the
Project registered as required under the Act and not providing facilities and
not attending construction as per permission obtained.

As such, a

complaint in Form ‘M’ vide Complaint No.601/2021 was filed before the
RERA Authority, which by order dt.26.09.2023 (Ex.A46) imposed penalty for
violating provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, inasmuch as the Project
was not registered with RERA.

Therefore, the case of the complainants gets

support from the said order of the Authority Ex.A46 and the complainants
may be granted compensation.
10(b). I have considered the said submission of the learned Counsel. I have
also gone through the said order Ex.A46 of the RERA Authority. A perusal
of said order shows that Sri Sreekanth Veerla, Smt.Pampa Modak and Sri
Bindhu Madhav Purohit, who are not parties to this case, had filed said
complaint and said order Ex. A46 was passed by the Authority.
10(c). In the said order Ex.A46, the RERA Authority referred to facts of said
case in Para 2 and 3, which read as under:

---

“2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant
raised issues with respect to the Respondent Builder not
registering its Project with this Authority and further upraised
this Authority of the various difficulties faced by the residents
of M/s.Maha Homes with regard to septic tank, water tank
being side by side, that there is no proper roadway, there are
water leakages and that there is delay in occupation. He also
submitted that because the Respondent is not registering its
Project with this Authority, the banks are not sanctioning
loans. The Complainants also pleaded that the work done by
the Respondent on the Project is not as per expectation and
accordingly prayed to take action against them in this regard.
3.

The Complainant, Sri Srikanth Veerla, along with

Complaint has filed an incomplete Agreement of

Sale

dt.25.11.2019 clearly establishing its rights in the Respondent
Builder’s residential project. He filed Encumbrance Certificate
which determines that the Sale Deed has been entered into
between the Respondent Builder and the Complainant Sri
Srikanth Veerla on 06.01.2019, along with the HMDA
Permission & Plan Copy dated 23.08.2019, Broucher issued
by the Respondent Builder and the Sale Deed of the
Respondent Builder duly acquiring the land on which the
present Residential Project is built.
Madhav

Purohit

filed

his

Complainant, Sri Bindu

registered

Sale

Deed

dated

28.04.2021 entered into between the Respondent Builder and
the Complainant, along with Encumbrance Certificate, HMDA
Permission & Plan Copy dated 23.08.2019 copy, Broucher
issued by the Respondent Builder. ”
The RERA Authority has framed following Issues in Para 6 of
the said order Ex.A46 as under:
i.

Whether the Respondent has violated Section 3(1) and
4(1) of the Act, 2016?

---

ii.

Whether the Parking Space as given in the HMDA Plan is
4, but the Respondent has crammed 20 spaces making it
difficult for the cars to pass through the drive way?

Then the RERA Authority has concluded on Issue No.1 in Para 9 as
under:“9.

Since the Authority has already issued a notice dated

08.11.2021 and Reminder Notice dated 01.02.2022 as to why
penalty under Section 59 (1) of the Act should not be imposed for
violating Section 3 & 4 of the Act, and no reply has been
submitted by the Respondent Builder in this regard, therefore,
this Authority deems fit that penalty ought to be imposed on the
Respondent Builder for apparent violation of the provisions of the
Act

and

the

Rules

thereunder.

Therefore,

a

penalty

of

Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) under Section 59 (1) of
the Act for registration of 18 flats @ Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand only) each and Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand
only) each for advertising remaining two Flats in violation of
Section 4 of the Act, is imposed on the Respondent Builder
payable within 15 days from the date of receipt of this Order in
favour of TS RERA FUNDS through Demand Draft or online
payment to A/c No.50100595798191, HDFC Bank, IFSC Code:
HDFC0007036.”
Thereafter, the RERA Authority considered Issue No.2 and held in Para 10,
which reads as under:
“10.

As per the HMDA Permission Letter dated: 23.08.2019

vide Application No.025256/SKP/R1/U6/HMDA/28062019,
the building permission has been sanctioned for stilt + 5 (five)
floors where stilt floor is considered that parking is deemed to
be satisfied as per G.O.Ms.No.168, dated: 07.04.2012.

---

Therefore, the parking space is rightly provided by the
Respondent.”
Ultimately, the RERA Authority under order Ex.A46 has disposed off
the complaint passing orders in Para-11 and 12, which reads as
under:
“11.

After consideration of the facts and circumstances, this

Authority directs the Respondent Builder to register its Project
‘Madhuram’ before this Authority within 15 days of the receipt
of this Order, as otherwise action under Section 63 of the Act
shall be taken in accordance with law.
12.

In lieu thereof, the present complaint stands disposed

of.”
10(d). Admittedly, the complainants in Complaint No.601/2021 (Ex.A46) are
not complainants in this case.

What are the terms and conditions of

Agreements or Sale Deeds between the complainants and respondents in
said Complaint No.601/2021 do not appear from order Ex.A46.

Though

from the facts of case in Complaint No.601/2021 as noted supra, it was the
case of the complainants therein that the Builder Maha Homes constructed
septic tank and water tank side by side and that there are no proper roads
and there are water leakages, no orders or directions are either sought or
given in said order on said aspects.

In these circumstances, the said order

of the Authority under Ex.A46 would be of no importance or helpful to the
complainants, especially in view of the discussion and reasons recorded
supra.

---

11.

No

doubt,

the

complainants

have

filed

copy

of

legal

notice

dt.20.02.2023 Ex.A38 said to have been issued by one Flat buyer and two
Agreements of Sale Exs.A55 and A61 executed between other Flat buyers
and respondent No.2 in respect of sale of Flat Nos.201 and 104 with
columns, beams and roof and car parking and one Sale Deed Ex.A22 for
sale of semi-finished Flat No.501 executed by respondent No.3 in favour of
Flat buyers.

The buyers of these Flats are not parties to the present

complaint. Even the contents of these documents are similar to documents
referred above filed by the complainants in respect of their Flats. As noted
supra, it is not the case of the complainants that there are certain other
contracts or agreements between respondents and buyers of said other Flats
mentioned in this para to say that as per such contract or agreements what
they contend regarding the failure of the respondents to attend either
construction works or other works has to be accepted. As such, the said
documents Exs.A38, A55, A61 and A22 will be of no help to the
complainants.
12.

The complainants have filed several other documents as mentioned in

appendix of evidence below.

Out of such documents, Maha Homes

marketing broucher (Ex.A5), E-mail reminders to the builder (Ex.A24) and
Apartment inspection report and estimate for repairs prepared by a
Structural Engineer (Ex.A65) relate to the case.

In the absence of any

contracts or agreements creating relationship and obligation between the
parties, this Authority has no hesitation to observe that the said documents
Exs.A5, A24 and A65 are of no help to the complainants.

Similarly, the

---

other several documents filed and marked as exhibits are also of no help for
said same reasons to the complainants.
13.

Learned Counsel for the complainants has advanced the other

contentions as mentioned in written arguments in detail. In support of his
contentions, he placed reliance on the decisions in M/s.Dwarakamai
Residency Owners vs. M/s. Sai Estates Developers rendered on 10.09.2012
by the A.P.State Consumer Disputes Reddressal Commission, Hyderabad
and in Siromani Mittasala, Chairman vs. President, Brindavanam Colony
[2002 (1) ALD-136].

I have gone through the contentions mentioned in

written arguments and the said decisions relied. On a careful consideration
of said contentions, I am of the considered view that every case has to be
decided in the light of pleadings and contract/agreement between the
parties. There being no contracts or agreements between the complainants
and respondents creating obligation on the respondents for the claims
made, it is very difficult to find force in the contentions on behalf of the
complainants.
14(a). It is also pertinent to note that as per sub-section 4 (a) of Section 11 of
the Act, the Promoter shall be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities
and functions under the provisions of the Act or the Rules and Regulations
made thereunder of allottees as per the Agreement of Sale. Proviso to this
sub-section further envisages that the responsibility of the promoter with
respect to the structural defect or any other defect for such period as is
referred to in sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act shall continue even
after the conveyance deed of all the apartments, plots or buildings, as the

---

case may be, to the allottees are executed. Sub-section (3) of Section 14 of
the Act envisages that in case any structural defect or any other defect in
workmanship, quality or provision of services or any other obligations of the
promoter as per the agreement for sale relating to such development is
brought to the notice of the promoter within a period of five years by the
allottees from the date of handing over possession, it shall be the duty of the
promoter to rectify such defects without further charge, within thirty days,
and in the event of failure of promoters to rectify such defects within such
time, the aggrieved allottees shall be entitled to receive appropriate
compensation as provided under the Act.
14(b). In the instant case, the complainants have failed to plead and prove
that there is a contract or agreement between them and respondents with
regard to alleged obligations as claimed. Section 11(4) (a) of the Act refers
that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligation as per the
Agreement for Sale. It means that there should be first either a contract or
agreement before making any claim against other party. In view of this, it
appears that the complainants and so also other buyers of Flats in the
Project, who approached RERA Authority, did not approach and seek
directions from the RERA Authority under Section 37 of the Act to the
respondents with regard to alleged unattended works. Therefore, the claim
made by the complainants is not tenable.
15.

For all the foregoing reasons, the conclusion that emerges on the Point

is that the complainants are not entitled for compensation.
answered accordingly.

The Point is

---

16.

In the result, the complaint is dismissed.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court
on this, the 24th day of MARCH, 2025.
ADJUDICATING OFFICER,
TG RERA: HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
NONE
EXHIBITS MARKED FOR COMPLAINANTS
Exhibit
Ex.A1

Date
31.01.2020

Ex.A2
Ex.A3
Ex.A4
Ex.A5
Ex.A6
Ex.A7
Ex.A8
Ex.A9
Ex.A10
Ex.A11
Ex.A12
Ex.A13

04.07.2019
11.04.2022
22.03.2022
Nil
15.09.2021
21.12.2020
29.08.2020
21.09.2022
03.10.2021
28.02.2023
11.03.2023
25.03.2021

Ex.A14
Ex.A15
Ex.A16
Ex.A17
Ex.A18
Ex.A19
Ex.A20
Ex.A21
Ex.A22
Ex.A23
Ex.A24
Ex.A25

29.01.2021
19.02.2021
03.10.2021
11.03.2023
20.04.2023
16.03.2022
28.02.2023
11.03.2023
11.02.2022
24.02.2022
…
09.09.2022

Ex.A26
Ex.A27
Ex.A28
Ex.A29
Ex.A30

13.07.2022
27.07.2022
…
…
…

Rc.S31

…

Description of document
Sanctioned Building Permission/plan
Proceedings.
Inspection Report of HMDA
Occupancy Certificate
Inspection Report.
Maha Homes marketing Broucher
Copy of Sale-deed document No34054/2021.
Copy of sale deed document No.23252/2020.
Copy of sale deed document No.30198/2022.
Copy of sale deed document No.32671/2022.
Photocopy of Property Assessment.
Property Mutation Proceedings.
Property Tax Payment Receipt for 2022-23
Photocopy of Sale Deed document
No.14397/2021.
Receipt for payment of Rs.1,00,000/Payment Receipt for Rs.3,35,000/-.
Copy of Property Assessment.
Copy of Property Mutation Proceedings.
Property Tax Payment Receipt.
Copy of Sale-Deed document No.10217/2022
Copy of Property Mutation Proceedings.
Property Tax Payment Receipt.
Copy of Sale-Deed document No.5587/2022.
Copy of Sale-Deed document No.96887/2021.
E-mail reminders to the Builder (18 pages)
Copy of e-mail sent regarding Flat No.201
issued by the complainant (2 pages)
First common current bill.
First common current bill payment receipt.
Fire accident incident Photo.
Electric Board Panel under Water pipeline.
Photos (2) of constructed Water Tank and septic
tank.
Photos (3) showing the Transformer area.

---

…
…

Ex.A34
Ex.A35
Ex.A36

…
…
…

Ex.A37

Dt.23.04.2024

Ex.A38

20.02.2023

Ex.A39
Ex.A40
Ex.A41

20.02.2023
23.02.2023
25.02.2023

Ex.A42

25.02.2023

Ex.A43

16.03.2023

Ex.A44
Ex.A45

16.03.2023
25.03.2023

Ex.A46

26.09.2023

Ex.A47

02.05.2024

Ex.A48

Nil

Ex.A49

12.02.2024

Ex.A50

19.03.2024

Ex.A51

12.02.2024

Ex.A52

01.04.2024

Ex.A53

12.04.2024

Ex.A54

10.05.2024

Ex.A55

19.09.2020

Ex.A56

14.06.2024

Ex.A57

23.08.2024

Ex.A58
Ex.A59

22.05.2022
21.06.2024

Ex.A60

06.01.2025

Photos (28) showing 26 car parking allotment.
Photos (20) showing leakage of water from
walls.
Photos (4) showing rain water harvesting issue.
Photos (8) showing leakage of water from slab.
Photos (9) showing wall cracks & poor
construction quality.
Copy of reply issued by Mission Bhagiratha
Department, Govt.of Telangana under RTI Act
to the RTI application, dt.12.04.2024.
Copy of legal notice send to Respondents by
owner of Flat No.201.
Copy of postal consignment (RN185015289IN)
Copy of postal consignment (RN188298878IN)
Copy of online postal acknowledgment for
postal consignment No. RN185015289IN.
Copy of online postal acknowledgment for
postal consignment No. RN185015289IN.
Copy of complaint letter submitted to HMDA by
the buyers.
Copy of RTI application submitted to RERA.
Copy of reply issued by RERA to Ex.A44 RTI
application.
Copy of RERA order in Complaint No.60/2021
against the builder.
Copy of RTI application submitted to TSSPDCL
authorities.
Copy of reply from TSSPDCL authorities to
Ex.A47 RTI application.
Copy of RTI application in State Disaster & Fire
Services Department.
Copy of reply from State Disaster & Fire
Services Department to Ex.A49 RTI application.
Copy of RTI application submitted to
HMWS&SB authorities.
Copy of reply from HMWS&SB authorities to
Ex.A51 RTI application.
Copy of RTI application submitted to Mission
Bhageeratha authorities.
Copy of reply from Mission Bhageeratha
authorities to Ex.A53 application.
Copy of Agreement of Sale in respect of Flat
No.201.
Copy of show-cause notice issued by RERA to
the respondents.
Online Encumbrance Certificate from
Registration Portal.
Advance payment receipt for Rs.8,00,000/Quotation for lift repair/service from Bright
Line Automation.
Copy of LIC Home Loan Interest Certificate in
respect of Loan A/c.No.710500016116.

---

26.09.2020

Ex.A62

27.12.2024

Ex.A63

20.03.2020

Ex.A64

06.03.2022

Ex.A65

07.01.2025

Copy of Agreement of Sale in respect of Flat
No.104.
Copy of LIC Home Loan Interest Certificate in
respect of Loan A/c.No.712700001840.
Copy of Agreement of Sale in respect of Flat
No.503.
Copy of Rent receipt for Rs.2,40,000/- in
respect of Complainant No.8.
Apartment inspection and estimation for repair
works by Sri V.S.Ravi, Structural Engineer.

Exhibits Marked for the Respondents:
Ex parte

ADJUDICATING OFFICER,
TG RERA: HYDERABAD.

CC.

---