Order Complaint No. 132 of 2025

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Complaint No. 132 of 2025
30th September, 2025
Quorum:

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

Durga Mahanti Vidyasagar
R/o-Flat No.210, Hallmark Gardenia, Road No.1
Alkapoor Township, Neknampur
Puppalguda

…Complainant

Hyderabad, Telangana 500089

AND
Bhuvanteza Infrastructures LLP
Rep. by
1. Chekka Bhagya Lakshmi
2.Chekka Venkata Subramanyam
Address for service of notices
i. H No. 15-31, RTP-1, Flat No.406, Rian Tree Park
Malaysia Township, Near Club House
Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500072
ii. Flat No. C-110, Jayabheri Orange County
Raod No.2, Financial District, Nanakramguda
Telangana 500032

…Respondent

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing on 26.06.2025
before this Authority in the presence of WRK Prasad, Counsel for the Complainant, none
appeared on behalf of the Respondent despite service of notice, and therefore the Respondents
was set ex-parte, and after hearing the Complainant, this Authority passes 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.

1

---

The Complainant submitted that he had initially entered into an Agreement of Sale

dated 01.02.2021 for Flat No. B-314 in the project titled “Aura (VELIMELA),” situated at
Velimela Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District, Telangana. It is stated that
the said agreement was not registered.
Subsequently, due to the Respondent’s failure to fulfil the commitments under the said

4.

agreement, the Complainant executed a second Agreement of Sale dated 18.03.2021, in respect
of Flat No. 205 in C-Block of the project “Tulasi Bhagyanagar (Dundigal),” located in
Dundigal, Hyderabad. However, this transaction also remained unfulfilled by the Respondent.
5.

The Complainant further submitted that, owing to persistent delays in project execution,

he was compelled to enter into yet another Agreement of Sale on 23.03.2022 for Flat No. 103
in B-Block of the same “Aura” project. Under this final agreement, the Complainant paid an
amount of Rs. 26,00,000/- out of the total sale consideration of Rs. 27,00,000/-, with the
remaining balance stated to be due at the time of registration.
6.

It is specifically contended that the said agreement was executed in the name of

“Bhuvanteza

Infrastructures

LLP,”

whereas

the

payment

receipts

and

revenue

acknowledgments were issued in the name of “Bhuvanteza Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.” The
Complainant has pointed out this discrepancy to demonstrate a possible deviation or
misrepresentation in the developer entity.
7.

As per the terms of the agreement, possession was to be delivered by July 2022, and

the Respondent had agreed to pay monthly rental compensation in case of delay. However,
despite the lapse of the stipulated time, the Complainant has neither been granted possession
of the flat nor has he received any rental compensation as promised.
B. Relief Sought
8.

In view of the facts and circumstances set out in the complaint, the Complainant

respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Authority may be pleased to:
i.

Completion and possession, Respondent to complete the construction and handover
possession of the flat within time of one year from day 18.02.2025, OR

ii.

Refund with interest and rental amount, refund of principal amount along with interest
to till date from the date of execution of sale deed and rental amount if the Respondent
fails to complete the project within the stipulated time.
2

---

In view of the facts and the reliefs sought, the following questions came up for

consideration before this Authority:
I.

Whether the Respondent has violated the provisions of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016?

II.

Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief sought? If so, to what extent?

D. Observation of the Authority
10.

Before getting into the observations, this Authority takes due note of the recurring

conduct of the Respondent herein, who have failed to appear before the Bench despite being
issued multiple notices and opportunities to appear. Therefore, have been set ex-parte and the
following observations have been made from the submissions of the Complainant, documents
and pleadings placed on record.
E. Observations of the Authority

Point I
11.

In Complaint No. 105 of 2024, vide order dated 16.05.2025, this Authority has already

adjudicated upon the violation of Sections 3 and 4 of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016, in respect of the
project ‘Aura (Velimela),’ undertaken by the Respondent, and accordingly imposed a penalty
of Rs. 14,91,958/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Ninety-One Thousand Nine Hundred and
Fifty-Eight only). In view of the said findings, and in deference to the doctrine of double
jeopardy, this Authority refrains from re-adjudicating the same issue in the present matter.
Accordingly, Point No. I stands answered in the affirmative.
Point II
12.

This Authority now proceeds to determine whether the Complainant is entitled to the

reliefs sought under the relevant provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development)
Act, 2016. Upon perusal of the pleadings and documents placed on record, it is evident that the
Respondent entered into multiple Agreements of Sale with the Complainant for various flats
across its projects.
13.

The record discloses that the first Agreement of Sale was executed on 01.02.2021 for

Flat No. B-314 in the project titled “Aura (Velimela).” Thereafter, on 18.03.2021, another
agreement was entered into for Flat No. 205 in C Block of the project “Tulasi Bhagyanagar.”
3

---

However, for the purposes of adjudication in the present complaint, this Authority

confines its examination to the latest Agreement of Sale dated 23.03.2022, in respect of Flat
No. 103 in B Block of the “Aura (Velimela)” project. The Complainant has paid a cumulative
sum of Rs. 26,00,000/- out of the total agreed consideration of Rs. 27,00,000/-. The Agreement
dated 23.03.2022 expressly stipulates in Clause 3 that the vendor undertook to complete
registration of the flat by the end of July 2022. Despite repeated efforts by the Complainant to
reach the Respondent and obtain an update on the status of construction, there was no response
or cooperation extended.
15.

The Complainant has therefore approached this Authority seeking either a direction for

completion and delivery of the flat within one year from 18.02.2025 or, in the alternative, a
refund of the amount paid with interest. This prayer is squarely covered under Section 18(1)(a)
of the RE(R&D) Act,2016 which reads as follows:
“If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an
apartment, plot or building,
(a) in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale or, as the case
may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or
(b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of
suspension or revocation of the registration under this Act or for any
other reason,
he shall be liable on demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to
withdraw from the project, without prejudice to any other remedy available, to
return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building,
with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf including
compensation in the manner as provided under this Act.”
16.

The object and legislative intent of Section 18 is unambiguous; it seeks to protect the

rights of the allottee from inordinate delay or failure by the promoter in handing over
possession. Where the promoter defaults in meeting contractual deadlines, the law provides a

4

---

In the instant case, there is a conspicuous and admitted failure by the Respondent to

complete the project “Aura (Velimela).” This Authority, in Complaint No. 105 of 2024, had
already recorded a finding that the project was only 20% complete as on the date of that
complaint, and no material has been produced by the Respondent to show any subsequent
progress in construction. This Authority had observed therein that:
“...As of the date of filing of this complaint, the status of the
project remains grossly incomplete, with construction having
progressed to only about 20%, as noted by the Complainants
and undisputed by the Respondents.”
18.

In light of the above, it is clear that the Respondent is neither in a position to deliver

possession in accordance with the Agreement dated 23.03.2022 nor has shown any bona fide
intention to complete the project. Notably, the Respondent has failed to appear even once
before this Authority, despite having been served with notices. This persistent non-appearance,
without justification or response, reflects a blatant disregard for the proceedings and further
reinforces the seriousness and credibility of the grievance raised by the Complainant. In such
a situation, compelling the Complainant to wait indefinitely would be manifestly unjust and
contrary to the protective framework established by the RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
19.

In such a situation, compelling the Complainant to wait indefinitely for possession -

without any clarity, commitment, or participation from the Respondent-would be manifestly
unjust and contrary to the protective framework established by the RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
Therefore, this Authority holds that the Complainant is well within his rights under Section
18(1)(a) to seek a refund of the amount paid, along with interest at the rate prescribed under
the Telangana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017. No additional burden
lies on the Complainant to demonstrate default beyond the admitted and apparent delay in
possession.
20.

Consequently, the Authority concludes that the Respondent is liable to refund the sum

of Rs. 26,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Six Lakhs only), along with interest at the rate of (SBI
MCLR rate+2%) 10.75% per annum from the date of execution of the said Agreement of Sale
till the date of actual payment.
5

---

Insofar as the additional relief sought by the Complainant towards monthly rental

compensation is concerned, this Authority observes that while such a claim has been raised in
connection with the delay in handing over possession, the Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Act, 2016 does not contemplate or provide any mechanism for adjudication of
disputes pertaining to rental arrangements. In view of the same, this Authority is constrained
to hold that it lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon or grant the relief sought by the
Complainant under this head.
E. Direction of the Authority
22.

In exercise of its powers under Section 37, this Authority issues the following

directions:
I.

Respondent is liable to refund Rs.26,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty-Six Lakhs Only) with
interest at the rate of 10.75% per annum (SBI MCLR of 8.75% + 2%) from the date of
the Agreement of sale dated 23.03.2022 with respect to Flat No. 103 in B Block of the
“Aura (Velimela)” project. of the Complainant till the date of actual refund in
accordance with Rule 15 of the Rules, 2017 within 30 (thirty) days;

23.

Failing to comply with the above said direction by the Respondent shall attract penalty

in accordance with Section 63 of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
24.

The Complaint is disposed of in lieu 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

6

---