Order Complaint No. 101 of 2024

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.101 OF 2024
29th Day of November 2024
Corum:

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

Smt. Kavitha Kumari Alladi

…Complainant
Versus

1. Sri G. Anand Reddy
2. Smt. G. Sharada Reddy
3. VB City LLP
represented by its promoters/landowners,
Sri G. Anand Reddy and Smt. G. Sharada Reddy

…Respondents

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing on
31.07.2024, 14.08.2024 and 29.08.2024 before this Authority in the presence of
Complainant in person, along with Counsel for Respondents, Sri Ch. Sharath Babu,
Smt. N. Nagalaxmi & Ms. A. Rakshitha Lahari, and after hearing the arguments, this
Authority passes the following ORDER:

2.

The present Complaint has been filed by the Complainants under Section 31

of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as
the “Act, 2016”) read with Rule 34(1) of the Telangana Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules, 2017”) seeking
appropriate relief(s) against the Respondents.
Brief facts on behalf of the Complainants:
3.

The Complainants submitted that she is the owner of Flat No. 513, Block A,

in the VB City Project, located in Turkapally Village, Alwal Mandal, Medchal
1 of 5

Malkajgiri District, Telangana. That the flat was purchased from the Respondents
through a sale deed bearing No. 587/2021.
4.

The Complainant further submitted that there have been recurring structural

issues in the form of cracks and water leakages on the terrace of Block A where her
flat is located. That these cracks have caused significant leakage during the rainy
season, affecting not only the terrace but also the corridors and flats on the top floor,
including the Complainant’s flat.
5.

The Complainant and other affected residents had repeatedly approached the

Respondents to address the leakage issue, thereafter, in July 2022, the Respondents
engaged a third-party vendor, JMC Projects Pvt. Ltd., to repair the terrace. However,
the repairs were only partial, wherein the Respondents installed TPO sheets, which
were fastened with nails. The Complainant submitted that this method is neither a
permanent fix nor a solution to the underlying structural defects. The Complainant
contends that these actions were inadequate and only addressed the problem
superficially.
6.

The Complainant further submitted that the terrace slab of Block A is

structurally defective and that the Respondents have acted negligently in delivering
a substandard and defective terrace. Despite repeated complaints from the
Complainant and other residents, the Respondents have failed to take appropriate
steps to address the root cause of the leakage, which lies in the defective construction
of the terrace.
Relief sought:
7.

Accordingly, the Complainant prayed to direct the Respondents to provide a

defect-free, crack-free, durable, and structurally sound terrace slab in Block A.

2 of 5

Counter on behalf of the Respondents:
8.

The Respondents submitted that the terrace is structurally sound, and the

complaints raised are baseless and without merit. It was submitted that upon
receiving a complaint in July 2022 from some residents, including the Complainant,
about potential leakages, the Respondents promptly engaged a reputable vendor,
JMC Projects Pvt. Ltd., to investigate and resolve the issue. The vendor, which
specializes in waterproofing and structural repairs, installed TPO sheets on the
terrace to prevent water ingress. These repairs were completed at no cost to the
residents, and the Respondents ensured that all necessary measures were taken to
rectify the issue to the highest standards.
9.

It was submitted that since the repairs were carried out, there have been no

further complaints regarding leakage or cracks from any of the residents of Block A.
Notably, two independent residents of the same floor as the Complainant—occupants
of Flat No. 510 and Flat No. 506—have provided written confirmations stating that
they have not experienced any leakage issues after the repairs were completed. The
Respondents also submitted these statements as Annexures 1 and 2.
10.

The Respondents further submitted that the Complainant has failed to

produce any evidence to substantiate her allegations. Despite her claims of ongoing
leakage, there are no inspection reports, technical assessments, or photographs
submitted to support her assertions. The absence of such evidence indicates that the
Complainant's allegations are speculative and without basis. That in January 2024,
the Complainant, along with her husband and representatives of the Owners'
Association, approached the Respondents with a demand to deposit funds for
potential future repairs of the terrace. The Respondents, upon reviewing the
condition of the terrace, found that there were no visible issues or defects, and

3 of 5

accordingly, they rightfully rejected the demand. This demand by the Complainant
was without merit and appears to be financially motivated.
11.

The Respondents, however, submitted that if any legitimate issue arises in

the future concerning the terrace of Block A, the Respondents will undertake the
necessary repairs in accordance with the provisions of the Act, 2016. But currently,
there are no existing defects or leakages in the terrace, and the complaint is entirely
baseless. Therefore, the Respondents prayed to dismiss the present Complaint with
exemplary costs.
Observations and directions of the Authority:
12.

The matter was called for hearing, wherein the Complainant appeared and

reiterated the contents of the Complaint. The Respondents also appeared and
reiterated contents of the Reply as mentioned above. This Authority has taken into
consideration the respective contentions of the parties and the documents filed by
them which form part of the record.

13.

As can be seen from the record, the Occupancy Certificate was granted to the

Project on 18.03.2021 and admittedly, the Complainant entered possession of its
Flat in the year 2021, subsequent to execution of the sale deed bearing Document
No.587/2021 dated 18.01.2021. Section 14(3) clearly stipulates that “(3) 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 allottee 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 promoter's failure to rectify such defects within such time, the aggrieved

4 of 5

allottees shall be entitled to receive appropriate compensation in the manner as
provided under this Act.”

14.

Therefore, within a period of 5 (five) years from the date of handing over of

possession by the Respondents, i.e., from 2021 to 2026, the Complainant could raise
such issue with respect to the structural defect of the terrace. Admittedly,
Complainant raised such request, and the Respondents undertook repairs on the
terrace flooring, however the same was not satisfactory and aggrieved by the same,
the Complainant approached this Authority.

15.

As seen from the photographs filed by the Complainant, it is clear that the

issue of terrace leakage has persisted despite multiple repair attempts by the
Respondents. The installation of TPO sheets, while intended as a long-term solution,
has not satisfactorily resolved the problem. As the Respondent has categorically
submitted that he shall undertake any such repairs of the terrace if this Authority,
the facts and circumstances of the case deems it fit to direct so, therefore, vide its
powers under Section 37, this Authority directs the Respondent to undertake
permanent and comprehensive repairs to the terrace of Block A under the
supervision of a engineer within a period of 60 days.

16.

Therefore, the present complaint is disposed of in light of the above directions.

No order as to costs.

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

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

Sd/Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.),
Hon'ble Chairperson,
TG RERA

5 of 5