Order Complaint No. 102 of 2025

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Complaint No. 102 of 2025
30th October 2025
Quorum:

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

Subhasish Kumar Sahu
(Flat No. 3061, Janapriya Nile Valley
PJR Enclave Road No-12, Chandanagar,
Hyderabad, Pin: 500050)

…Complainant
Versus

M/s Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt Ltd.
(Rep by Managing Director Kakarla Srinivas)
(Plot No: 140/141, Eminent Plaza,6th Phase,
KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Pin: 500085)

…Respondent

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for final hearing on
17.07.2025 before this Authority in the presence of the Complainant’s authorised
representative, Mrs. Alka Kumari Sahu, and none appeared on behalf of the Respondents
despite service of notice; hence, set ex parte and upon hearing the submissions of the
Complainant, this Authority proceeds to pass the following ORDER:
2.

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

Estate (Regulation & 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 appropriate relief(s) against the Respondents.
A. Brief facts of the case:
3.

The Complainant has submitted that he had booked a flat under a pre-launch offer

floated by M/s Jayathri Infrastructures India Private Limited for the project titled “Hilton”. At
Page 1 of 6

---

The Complainant contends that, thereafter, the Respondent, without prior intimation or

consent, had allegedly delegated the development and sale activities concerning the said flats
to another entity, Raja Developers. Subsequently, signage of “Raja Developers” appeared at
Block No. 5 of the project site, indicating that they were undertaking construction and sale of
flats therein. The Complainant submitted that, upon seeking clarification from M/s Jayathri
Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd. regarding this development and ownership of the project land,
no response was forthcoming despite repeated representations.
5.

The Complainant submitted that he received a letter from M/s Janapriya Townships

Pvt. Ltd., categorically stating that Blocks 2B, 5, and 6 of Janapriya Nile Valley had not been
sold to any developer and would be developed by Janapriya itself. They also warned potential
buyers against booking properties in these towers with any developer, particularly M/S Jayatri
Infrastructure India Pvt Ltd, as such sales under the brand name Hilton are considered illegal.
6.

The Complainant submitted that upon discovering that the “Hilton” project was being

marketed and sold without lawful rights, the Complainant approached the Respondent for the
refund of the amounts paid to the Respondent. The Respondent thereafter issued the following
cheques towards refund and settlement of including an interest amount of Rs. 37,97,500/The details of the cheque as follows;
1. Cheque No. 000138 for the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- dated 05 October 2022.
2. Cheque No. 000139 for the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- dated 08 October 2022.
3. Cheque No. 000140 for the amount of Rs. 7,97,000/- dated 11 October 2022.
7.

The Complainant has submitted that all the above cheques were dishonoured upon

presentation due to insufficient funds. Despite informing the Respondent about the dishonour,
no remedial action was taken. Subsequently, the Respondent refunded only a sum of
Page 2 of 6

---

Thereafter, at the insistence of the Complainant, the parties executed a Refund-cum-

Cancellation Agreement on 03.05.2023, wherein the Respondent undertook to refund the
remaining principal amount of ₹29,84,000/- on or before 15.06.2023, failing which the
Respondent would be liable to pay the said amount along with interest at 12% per annum.
However, the Respondent failed to comply with the said terms. As a result, the total outstanding
amount, inclusive of interest, has accumulated to ₹42,46,760/- as on 02.02.2025.
9.

In view of the Respondent’s continued default and failure to honour the terms of the

Refund-cum-Cancellation Agreement, the Complainant approached this Authority seeking
redressal and refund of the said amount along with applicable interest under the provisions of
the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
B. Relief sought
10.

Accordingly, the Complainant sought the following reliefs:
Direct the Respondent to refund the total amount with interest.

C. Points to be determined:
11. Based on the facts and circumstances placed before this Authority, the following
questions arise for adjudication:
Whether the Complainant is entitled to the reliefs sought?
D. Observations of the Authority:
12.

Before further adjudicating on the matter, this Authority takes due note of the repeated

non-compliance by the Respondents, who have failed to appear before this Authority despite
service of multiple notices and affording sufficient opportunities. In view of their continued
absence, the Respondents are hereby set ex parte on 17.07.2025, and the matter is being
adjudicated based on the pleadings, documents, and submissions placed on record by the
Complainant.
13.

Upon perusal of the available documents before this authority submitted by the

Complainant, it is evident that the parties have entered into an MoU, i.e., with M/s Jayathri
Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd Rep by Kakarla Srinivas on 3rd Sep 2021 under a pre-launch offer for
Page 3 of 6

---

The complainant has paid a substantial amount totalling Rs. 34,84,000/- through online

towards the purchase of a flat in the Respondents' project under pre-launch. However, despite
receiving the consideration, the Respondent has neither commenced any construction activity
in the said project nor demonstrated any bona fide intention to fulfil its contractual obligations.
Such continued inaction, even after collecting substantial amounts of money from the
Complainant, points to a deliberate and dishonest course of conduct from the Respondents.
15.

The Complainant has submitted that, although the Respondent had issued certain

cheques towards the refund of the amounts paid, the said cheques were dishonoured upon
presentation due to insufficient funds. The Complainant further stated that despite bringing this
fact to the notice of the Respondent, no corrective steps were taken. Subsequently, the
Respondent refunded only a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- out of the total amount of Rs. 34,84,000/received from the Complainant. The Complainant has, therefore, sought a refund of the balance
amount of Rs. 29,84,000/- along with interest. It is further submitted that though a refund-cumcancellation agreement dated 03.05.2023 was also executed between the parties, the
Respondent failed to adhere to the terms stipulated therein, thereby causing continued hardship
to the Complainant.
16.

In these circumstances, under Section 18(1) of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016, it extends a

clear statutory right to an allottee to seek a refund along with interest where the
promoter/Respondents either fail to complete the project or are unable to hand over possession
within the stipulated timeframe. So, the allottee is entitled to a refund of the amount paid along
with applicable interest. In the present case, the issue is not merely one of delay; it is a case of
complete inaction on the Respondents.
17.

In light of the above foregoing observations, this Authority notes that the Complainant

is entitled for relief as mentioned in the main complaint under Section 18(1)(a) of the Real
Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which reads as follows:
(1) If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment,
plot or building,

Page 4 of 6

---

In the present case, the Respondent neither completed the project nor initiated the

mandatory statutory processes required for lawful execution of the project. The continued
failure to commence the construction clearly amounts to a violation of the provisions of the
RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
19.

Consequently, in light of the respondent’s failure to fulfil its obligations and the

complainants’ clear intention to withdraw, this Authority holds that the respondent is liable to
refund the entire amounts collected from the complainants along with interest, as mandated
under Section 18(1)(a) of the RE(R&D) Act.
20.

The interest shall be computed from the respective dates of receipt of payments made

by the complainant to the respondent.
21.

The Complainant has also alleged that the Respondent had unauthorisedly delegated

the development and sale activities relating to the said flats to another entity, Raja Developers.
However, it is noted that the said entity has not been impleaded as a party to the present
proceedings, nor has any specific relief been sought against it. Accordingly, this Authority
confines its adjudication to the Respondent alone.
22.

It is pertinent to note that this Authority has already adjudicated similar complaints

arising out of the same project, “Jaya Hilton Project ”, promoted by M/s Jayathri Infrastructures
India Pvt. Ltd., Complaint No. 163 of 2025 & Ors (Jaya Hilton Batch II). In those matters as
well, the Authority had observed identical patterns of non-compliance, inter alia, the collection
of substantial amounts from allottees under a pre-launch offer and failure to commence
construction within a reasonable period. The Authority had further recorded findings that M/s
Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd., without holding an unencumbered and marketable title
Page 5 of 6

---

Accordingly, the Complainant entitled for Refund of the amount paid by him to the

Respondents and also with the interest at the rate prescribed under Rule 15 of the Telangana
Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, i.e., the State Bank of India’s Marginal
Cost of Lending Rate (MCLR) plus 2% per annum (i.e., 8.75% + 2%), calculated from the from
the respective dates of receipt of payments made by the complainant to the respondent.
F. Directions of the Authority:
24.

In view of the foregoing findings and in exercise of the powers conferred under the

Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the Authority issues the following
directions:
a) The respondent, M/s Jayathri Infrastructures Pvt Ltd., is hereby directed to refund
the amount collected from the Complainant, i.e., 29,84,000/-, along with interest at the
rate of 10.75% per annum (SBI MCLR of 8.75% + 2%) within Thirty (30) days from
the date of receipt of this order.
b) The said interest shall be calculated from the respective dates of receipt of each
payment made by the complainant to the respondent until full refund is made.
25.

Failure to comply with the above directions by the Respondent shall attract a penalty in

accordance with Section 63 of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
26.

As a result, the complaint is disposed of accordingly. 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

Page 6 of 6

---