Interim Order Complaint No. 37 of 2024

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.37 OF 2024
14th Day of August, 2024
Corum:

Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.), Hon’ble Chairperson
Sri K. Srinivasa Rao, Hon’ble Member
Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu, Hon’ble Member

Sri G. Kiran Kumar Goud

…Complainant
Versus

1. M/s Green Metro Infratech Projects Pvt. Ltd.,
Represented through its Authorised Representative,
Sri Boddu Ashok Kumar
2. M/s Bhuvanteza Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.,
Represented through its Authorised Representative,
Sri Chekka V. Subramanyam
…Respondents

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing
on 05.06.2024, 09.07.2024, 31.07.2024 and 14.08.2024 before this Authority in
the presence of Complainant in person, and Counsel for Respondent No.1, Sri
V.M.N.S. Prasad, Sri U. Narendra and Sri Govind Narayana Swami, none for
Respondent No.2, and upon hearing the arguments, this Authority passes the
following INTERIM ORDER:

2.

The present Complaint has been filed under Section 31 of the Real Estate

(Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) read
with Rule 34(1) of the Telangana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules,
2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”) seeking interim directions to the

1 of 4

Respondent No.1 not to create any third-party rights on the Flat No.407, Block
C at Tulasi Bhagyanagar Project, Dundigal registered with this Authority vide
Registration No.P02200002031.

3.

The Complainant submitted that he paid total sale consideration of

Rs.24,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Only) by way of cheque and cash as
on 13.02.2021 to Respondent No.2, M/s Bhuvanteza Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.,
through its Authorised Representative, Sri Chekka V. Subramanyam towards
purchase of Flat No.407, Block C at Tulasi Bhagyanagar Project, Dundigal. That
the Respondent No.2 also executed Agreement of Sale dated 23.11.2020 in favour
of the Complainant in this regard. Further, the Complainant paid Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the Respondent No.1 on 17.06.2023 towards
interior works of the said Flat for which a receipt was duly received by the
Complainant from the Respondent No.1. That both Respondents promised to
register the said Flat in favour of the Complainant, however, almost 3 years have
elapsed, but there has been no response from the Respondents.

4.

Meanwhile, notices have been issued to the Respondents and the notices

have been returned for Respondent No.2, whereas, Respondent No.1 entered
appearance through its counsel. Respondent No.1 also filed a reply, primarily
submitting that there was no such Agreement executed by the said Respondent
in favour of Complainant and that therefore, there is no privity of contract
between the Complainant and the Respondent No.1. It was submitted that as per
Complainants’ own submissions amounts were completely received by the
Respondent No.2 and that Respondent No.1 cannot be made liable for fraudulent
actions of Respondent No.2. It was also specifically submitted that the

2 of 4

Respondent No.1 never entered into any agreement with Respondent No.2 for
sale/marketing/advertising of the Respondent No.1’s flats in the Tulasi
Bhagyanagar Project, Dundigal. Further, it was categorically submitted that the
amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) paid by Complainant was
sent by mistake to Respondent No.1, which has been refunded on 16.05.2024 to
the Complainant. That, therefore, it was prayed that present complaint be
dismissed against the said Respondent No.1.

Interim Directions:
5.

This Authority has perused the material on record and heard contentions

of both the parties. During the hearing, the Complainants reiterated the contents
of their complaint and sought for interim reliefs whereas, the Respondent No.1
prayed not to issue any interim directions to Respondent No.1 as there exists no
privity of contract between the Complainant and the Respondent No.1.

6.

This Authority heard this matter along with other connected matters and

observes that amounts were sent by the Complainant to the Respondent No.1
through Respondent No.2, who has failed to appear before this Authority. It is
observed that, admittedly, amounts were sent by the Complainant to the
Respondent No.1. If at all Respondent No.1 assumed that the said amounts were
receiving by error on part of the Complainants, he ought to have reversed the
transaction within a period of one month or such reasonable period from the date
of transaction. However, Respondent No.1 reversed the said amounts on
16.05.2024, after an inordinate delay of nearly 1 (one) year, which clearly
indicates Respondent No.1's intent. The fact that Respondent No.1 reversed the
amounts only after the Complainants filed the present complaint before this

3 of 4

Authority in March 2024 raises grave suspicion regarding the Respondent's
actions in violation of the provisions of the Act, 2016. It appears that Respondent
No.1 is attempting to abdicate its responsibility to the detriment of the innocent
Complainants.

7.

This, in view of the Authority is not permissible and therefore, in order to

protect the rights and interests of the Complainant/allottee, in the interim, this
Authority directs Respondent No.1 not to alienate/sell/transfer or create any thirdparty rights on Flat No.407, Block C at Tulasi Bhagyanagar Project, Dundigal until
the present complaint is finally disposed of by this Authority. Upon failure of the
Respondent to comply with this order appropriate action under Section 63 will be
initiated against the Respondent No.1.

8.

Matter is listed for further hearing on 10.09.2024.

Sd/Sri K. Srinivasa Rao,
Hon'ble Member,
TS RERA

Sd/Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu,
Hon'ble Member,
TS RERA

4 of 4