CCP No.32 of 2024 dt.25.02.2025

Page |1

BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER,
TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
HYDERABAD.
Dated, this, the 25th day of FEBRUARY, 2025.
Present:- Sri Syed Lateef-ur Rahman,
Adjudicating Officer.
COMPLAINT No.32/2024/TG RERA
Between:
Sri Sridhar Bollabathula, Flat No.G6, SR Castle, Road No.10, Sri Sai Balaji
Enclave, Mallampet, Bachupally, Qutbullapur, Ranga Reddy – 500 090.
and

…Complainant.

1) Vision Pride Infra Services, rep., by its Managing Director Sri
Tumuluri Santosh Kumar, H.No.6-3-1239/2/A, Koti’s Court,
3rd Floor, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad – 500 082.
2) Vision Pride Real Estate Developers, rep., by its Managing Director
Sri Tumuluri Santosh Kumar, H.No.6-3-1239/2/A, Koti’s Court,
3rd Floor, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad – 500 082.
…Respondents.
This complaint came up for hearing before me on 06.02.2025 in the presence of the
complainant in person and Respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained ex parte, upon hearing the
argument of the complainant and having stood over for consideration till this day, the
following order is passed:
ORDER
The present complaint has been filed u/s 31 of Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) read with Rule 35 of the
Telangana State Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the Rules’) by the complainant against the Respondents for award of
compensation.

---

CASE OF THE COMPLAINANT:
2(a). The factual matrix as gathered from the complaint reveals that the complainant and
respondent No.1 came in contact for the first time during the month of September, 2018.
Respondent No.1 offered to sell a plot admeasuring 133 Sq.Yards in Sy.Nos.157/EE/1 and
157/U3/1 situated at Kalakonda village, Madugul Mandal, Ranga Reddy District for a sale
consideration of Rs.2,30,000/- (Rs.Two Lakhs and Thirty Thousand only). The complainant
has paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One Lakh only) under receipt bearing No.579,
dt.29.09.2018.

Later, the complainant has made remaining payment of Rs.1,30,000/-

(Rs.One Lakh and Thirty Thousand only) under Receipt dt.02.12.2018 and in this receipt
there is a mention to the extent of plot agreed to be sold. According to complainant,
Respondent No.1 executed Membership Purchase Agreement for Holidays dt.29.09.2018.
The complainant pleads that Respondent No.1 later failed to get the land developed and
also to get layout from DTCP. After much persuasion, Respondent No.1 at last executed a
Registered Sale Deed dt.14.09.2019 in respect of said Plot No.2 admeasuring 133 Sq.Yards
in said Survey numbers.
2(b). It is further pleaded by the complainant that Respondent No.1 promised to develop
the land by planting Malabar Neem Trees with Resort facilities, but failed to do so. It is
stated that since 5 years, the land is not developed though Respondent No.1 promised to
develop the Project in two years with all amenities. Respondent No.1 also did not get the
Project registered with Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Respondent No.1 has started
another Company in the name and style of Vision Pride Real Estate Developers, i.e., R-2
Company to take up the activities of real estate. The complainant asserts that he lost the

---

profits from the said plot purchased due to failure of Respondent No.1 Company in
developing the Project as promised. Therefore, the complainant claims compensation
under various heads, viz., Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) towards mental stress;
Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) towards Advocate fee; Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) towards loss of working days and Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs
only) towards loss of rent. Thus, the complainant prays to award a compensation of
Rs.8,70,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh and Seventy Thousand only).
3.

Notices were issued to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 by Registered Post and

Acknowledgment Due. Notices so sent first time were not returned. Again fresh notices
were ordered to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 at request of complainant and such notices were
entrusted to the complainant to serve the same on Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and file proof of
service and case was adjourned to 16.01.2025. On 16.01.2025, the complainant filed his
affidavit with photos (3 in number) said to be of Manager and Front Desk stating inter alia
that the complainant went to the office of the respondents in order to serve the notices at
the addresses of Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and that the said two persons by name
Veeresham and Kalyan refused to receive notices and the complainant returned three (3)
notices handed over to him for service. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have been called on
16.01.2025 and they remained absent.

Having perused the affidavit filed and the

circumstances mentioned therein with regard to attempt made by the complainant to serve
the notices, it was concluded that the refusal to receive notices by said persons on behalf of
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 amounts to refusal to receive notices and as such, the same has to
be presumed as sufficient service. Therefore, Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have been set ex
parte and the case adjourned for ex parte evidence.

---

4.

The complainant filed his affidavit in lieu of his evidence and got marked Exs.A1 to

A7.
5.

Heard the complainant.

6.

Now the Point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for

compensation and if so, to what amount?
7.

POINT:
A reference to the case of the complainant while referring to the contents of the

complaint has been made supra.

In support of his case, the complainant has filed his

affidavit in lieu of oral evidence and also got marked Exs.A1 to A7. Ex.A1 is copy of
Registered Sale Deed executed by Respondent No.1 in favour of complainant in respect of
Plot No.2 sold in favour of the complainant. Ex.A2 is copy of receipt dt.29.09.2018 for
payment of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One Lakh only) to Respondent No.1. Ex.A3 is another receipt
for payment of Rs.1,30,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Thirty Thousand only) by the
complainant to Respondent No.1. Ex.A4 is the Copy of Membership Purchase Agreement
dt.29.09.2018. Ex.A5 is said to be a copy of sketch showing the plots made by Respondent
No.1 in said Survey numbers and out of such plots, Plot No.2 was sold to the complainant
under Ex.A1 Sale Deed. Ex.A6 is copy of Holiday Gift Voucher dt.29.09.2018. Ex.A7 is copy
of Gift Voucher. A perusal of affidavit of complainant coupled with said documentary
evidence Exs.A1 to A7 supports the contentions raised by the complainant.

The

respondents failed to appear and contest the claim of the complainant. Admittedly, the
complainant made purchase of said plot from Respondent No.1. The complainant pleaded
that Respondent No.1 has also established another Company, i.e., Respondent No.2

---

Company. Since the complainant purchased the said plot from Respondent No.1 and
Respondent No.1 failed to develop the Project and delayed execution of sale deed as
pleaded in the complaint, Respondent No.1 would be alone liable to answer the claim of the
complainant. Therefore and in view of the fact that Respondent No.1 failed to appear and
contest the claim of the complainant, the complainant is entitled for compensation from
Respondent No.1 only.
8.

In view of said conclusion that the complainant is entitled for compensation, it has

to be noted that the compensation has to be granted under the heads pecuniary and nonpecuniary. Though compensation has not been defined under the Act, Section 72 of the Act
speaks about factors to be taken into consideration while adjudicating the question of
compensation, which reads as under:
“Sec.72. Factors to be taken into account by the Adjudicating Officer:While adjudging the quantum of compensation or interest, as the case may be,
under Section 71, the adjudicating officer shall have due regard to the
following factors, namely:(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

9.

the amount of disproportionate gain or unfair advantage, wherever
quantifiable, made as a result of the default;
the amount of loss caused as a result of the default;
the repetitive nature of the default;
such other factors which the adjudicating officer considers necessary to
the case in furtherance of justice.”

For determining the compensation to be granted to the complainants for loss or

injury due to non-delivery of possession on time, there is Authority of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in “M/s. Fortune Infrastructure (now known as M/s.Hicon Infrastructure) and
another vs. Trevor D’Lima and others, Civil Appeal No.(s) 3533-3534 of 2017 decided
on 12.03.2018, wherein it is held :

---

“No hard and fast rule can be laid down, however, a few examples
would be where an allotment is made, price is received/paid, but
possession is not given within the period set out in the brochure. The
Commission/Forum would then need to determine the loss. Loss could
be determined on basis of loss of rent which could have been earned if
possession was given and the premises let out or if the consumer had
to stay in rented premises, then on the basis of rent actually paid by
him. Along with recompensing the loss, the Commission/Forum may
also compensate for harassment/injury, both mental and physical.”

In the aforesaid case, the Hon’ble Apex Court laid down the principle for entitlement
of the compensation due to loss or injury and its scope in cases where the promoter of real
estate failed to complete the project and defaulted in handing over its possession.
10.

The complainant has claimed compensation under various heads as noted supra.

Admittedly, the complainant agreed to purchase the plot for a total consideration of
Rs.2,30,000/- in the month of September, 2018. However , the sale Deed Ex.A1 shows that
the sale consideration for purchase of plot mentioned therein is Rs.33,500/-. This may be
due to the understanding between the parties or due to the market value of the plot
purchased. The fact remains that the case of the complainant regarding purchase of plot
and the alleged harassment and mental agony caused to the complainant as pleaded in the
complaint is unchallenged.

No doubt, the plot purchased by the complainant is for

Rs.2,30,000/-. For poor people in our Indian society, such amount cannot be taken as very
meagre. Such an amount for poor people in our Indian society has to be taken as a
challenge for them and it would be a serious saving for them or a serious expenditure to
have a house in their life. Our Indians would be emotionally attached to a residential house
for the family. In the circumstances, the pleadings as advanced by the complainant to claim
compensation cannot be taken in a lighter way. However, considering the location of the

---

property and extent of plot and its value, it is very difficult to accept the contention of the
complainant that he can claim compensation towards loss of rent, much less an amount of
Rs.3,00,000/- as claimed by him. However, having regard to facts and circumstances of the
case and the amount spent for purchase of plot and the unchallenged pleading of the
complainant supported by documentary evidence Exs.A1 to A7, I am of the considered view
that the complainant is entitled for following compensation under different heads:
Sl.No.

Head(s)

Amount (in Rupees)

1

Compensation towards loss of
income on working days due to
visits by the complainant to get
the plot registered and to request
to
make
development
as
promised.
Compensation
towards
harassment and mental agony.
Compensation towards Advocate

20,000-00

2
3

50,000-00
10,000-00

fee
TOTAL

80,000-00

(Rupees Eighty Thousand only). The Point is accordingly answered in favour of
complainant and against Respondent No.1.
11.

In the result, Respondent No.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.80,000/-

(Rs.Eighty Thousand only) towards compensation within (60) days from the date of this
Order, failing which, Respondent No.1 shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 10% per
annum (highest MCLR rate of 8% plus 2% i.e., 10% per annum) as per Rule 15 of the Rules

---

from the date of complaint till realization. The complaint is partly allowed accordingly. It
is needless to mention that the complaint against Respondent No.2 is dismissed.
Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this, the 25th day of
FEBRUARY, 2025.
Sd/ADJUDICATING OFFICER,
TG RERA: HYDERABAD.

WITNESSES EXAMINED
None
Exhibits marked for complainant:
Ex.A1
Ex.A2

Dt.14.09.2019
Dt.29.09.2018

Ex.A3

Dt. 02.12.2018

Ex.A4

Dt.29.09.2028

Ex.A5

Dt.NIL

Ex.A6
Ex.A7

Dt.29.09.2018
Dt.NIL

Copy of Sale Deed.
Copy of receipt No.579 for receipt of Rs.1,00,000/- by
Respondent No.1 from complainant.
Copy of receipt No.968 for receipt of Rs.1,30,000/- by
Respondent No.1 from complainant.
Copy of Membership purchase agreement for holidays and
club membership.
Said to be a copy of sketch showing the plots made by
Respondent No.1 in said Survey numbers and out of such
plots, Plot No.2 was sold to the complainant under Ex.A1
Sale Deed.
Copy of Holiday Gift Voucher dt.29.09.2018.
Copy of Gift Voucher.
Exhibits marked for Respondents
NIL (Respondents ex parte)
Sd/ADJUDICATING OFFICER,
TG RERA: HYDERABAD.

Cc.

---