Order Complaint No. 156 OF 2024

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.156 OF 2024
28th Day of April 2025
Quorum:

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

1. Sri Gadupudi Naresh Babu
2. Sri Shaik Abdul Samiullah
3. Sri K Srinivas Gandhi
4. Sri Srinivasa Ramarao Rao
5. Smt. Kalvala Venkata Naga Lakshmi Bharathi
6. Smt. G. Lavanya
H.No. 14-24/64/2/7, Plot No. 07
Krishna Devaraya Nagar, Phase 1,
Beeramguda, Hyderabad – 502032.

…Complainants
Versus

Smt. Sudharani Chekka
M/s R. Homes Resltors Global LLP,
Plot No. 33 & 35, Sai Krishna Villas,
Flat No. 503, 5th floor, AS Raju Nagar,
Kukatpally- 500072, Hyderabad.

…Respondent

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing
on 17.10.2024, 12.11.2024 & 10.12.2024 before this Authority in the
presence of Complainants in person and none for Respondent despite service
of notice who are set ex-parte, and after hearing the arguments, 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 read with
Rule (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 reliefs against the Respondents.

1 of 7

A. Brief facts of the case:
3.

The Complainants submitted that the Respondent, through its

Company, M/s R Homes Realtors Global LLP approached them in the year
2021 to buy property in the Project "Jai Vasavi's ORR Heights” Phase II with
3 towers (G+5) registered with this Authority vide Regn. No.P01100005314
dated 23.11.2022. The Complainants showed interest in buying their
respective

flats

and

booked

them.

The

Respondent

informed

the

Complainants that the Complainants will be provided with new sale
agreements after approvals are obtained. That revised agreements were
provided to some of the Complainants in the year 2023, however, few of the
Complainants didn’t receive any information about the new agreements.
4.

The Complainants submitted that as per the allotment and Agreement

of Investment, the total consideration for the property was Rs.1,52,01,720/(Rupees One Crore Fifty-Two Lakhs One Thousand Seven Hundred and
Twenty only) and attached copies of allotment letter and the Agreement issued
by the Respondent. The Complainants paid a total amount of Rs.80,91,270/(Rupees Eighty Lakh Ninety-One Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy only)
during the year 2021 and Respondent issued the receipts for the same.
5.

The Complainants further submitted that the Respondent promised to

obtain the required approvals by end of 2021 and the construction will start
from January 2022, however, there has been no progress till now. As per the
agreement of investment, the project should be completed in 3 years from the
date of final approvals, wherein, the HMDA approval (HMDA DPMS file No.
049501/SKP/R1/U6/HMDA/08102021) for G+5 for 3 blocks was issued in
Sep 2022.
6.

The Complainants also submitted that they had been visiting the site

regularly, however there is no progress wherein the digging work started last
year and the construction of the base structure is not completed till date.
Despite several telephonic reminders, communications & Personal visits, the
Respondent is delaying the construction.

2 of 7

7.

It was submitted on behalf of the Complainants that, the Respondent

had induced the Complainants to invest in their project by making false and
misleading statements. That even after 2+ years from the date of investment
in the said property, the Respondent has failed to handover the flats booked
by the Respondent. As per the meeting held on 02.01.2024, at the
construction site with the Respondent, a commitment was made to complete
the first slab for all blocks by 31.03.2024. However, this commitment had not
been fulfilled. It has now been communicated by the Respondent that an
additional three months are required to obtain revised approvals for a G + 9
structure, whereas the initial plan was for a G + 5 structure.
8.

The Complainants submitted that the Respondent is not sharing correct

information with the Complainants. That the Master floor plan has been
changed 6 times till now and that the revised the plan from G + 5 to G + 9
was made without the consent of the Complainants. Despite issuance of
letters, there is no response from the Respondent.
B. Relief(s) sought:
9.

Accordingly, the Complainants prayed that since they don't have any

more trust on the Respondent, they sought for refund of total amount paid to
the Respondent along with the interest from the date of payment till the date
of realization.
C. Points for consideration:
10.

After deliberation on the facts and circumstances of the present case

and the documents filed in this behalf, following issues sprout for
consideration:
I.

Whether the Respondent has violated Section 3 of the Act, 2016?

II.

Whether the Complainants are entitled to relief(s) as prayed for? If
yes, to what extent?

3 of 7

D. Observations of the Authority:
Point I
10.

Notice was issued to the Respondent and duly received by her, however,

no response/representation was filed on her behalf. As the Complainants
submitted that the respective agreements were executed prior to obtaining
registration from this Authority, this Authority issued show cause notices to
the Respondent to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed for
violation of Section 3 which prohibits any promoter to market, book, sell or
offer for sale, or invite persons to purchase in any manner any plot, apartment
or building, as the case may be, in any real estate project or part of it, in any
planning area, without registering the real estate project with the Authority.
11.

Despite being in receipt of the same, there is no reply on behalf of the

Respondent, thereby constraining this Authority to proceed further in the
matter.
12.

This Authority has perused the Agreements of Investment filed on

behalf of the Complainants along with allotment letters and payment receipts
issued by the Respondent. The Respondent has clearly promised the
Complainants, in the respective Agreement of Investment, that the possession
of the respective flat/Apartment shall be given within 30 (thirty) months from
the date of final approvals along with a grace period of 6 (six) months, which
shows that the said agreement was entered into before obtaining permission
from the competent authority. As per the documents filed by the
Complainants, on 26.09.2022, the HMDA accorded approval for construction
of 3 Blocks consisting of Cellar + Ground + 5 upper floors each, and further
directed the Respondent to approach Executive Authority, Kardanur Gram
Panchayat, Patancheruvu Mandal for release & sanction of the same. This
goes to show that the Respondent, without having permission from the
competent authority and RERA registration, executed agreements in favour of
the Complainant, grossly violating Section 3. Therefore, the Respondent is
liable for penalty under Section 59 of the Act, 2016.

4 of 7

Point II
14.

Coming to the reliefs prayed for by the Complainants, the Complainants

only sought for refund of the amounts prayed as the Respondent has failed to
start construction till date. That this delay on part of the Respondent is not
agreeable to the Complainants, on account of which they are seeking refund
of the amounts paid by them along with interest as per Rules, 2017.
15.

Section 18(1) of the Act, 2016 stipulates that “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, as the case may be, with interest at
such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf including compensation in the
manner as provided under this Act.”
16.

A plain reading of the above provision goes to show that the

Complainants are entitled to relief of refund along with interest in accordance
with Rule 15 of the Rules, 2017 only when the “promoter fails to complete or
is unable to give possession in accordance with the terms of the agreement
for sale”. In the agreements of sale/investment, as has been filed by the
Complainants towards purchase of the respective flat, it is categorically
agreed to by the Complainants that the possession of the respective flat will
be given within 30 (thirty) months from the date of final approvals along with
a grace period of 6 (six) months. Admittedly, the HMDA approval was obtained
on 26.09.2022 and therefore, the Respondent has time until 25.09.2025 to be
able to handover the possession of the flat, in accordance with the respective
agreement of investment.

5 of 7

17.

Even though the Agreement of Investment is not in the format as

provided under Annexure to Rule 38 of the Rules, 2017, as the plain reading
of Section 18 stipulates that the agreement entered into between the parties
shall decide the terms of refund or such other terms, then the same becomes
sacrosanct. The Complainants cannot now turn back and seek refund
submitting that the Respondent has not been able to provide possession of
their respective flat without adhering to the terms of the agreement. However,
if the Respondent failed to give possession after the stipulated time frame as
agreed in the respective agreement executed with each Complainant, the
Complainants are at liberty of approaching this Authority to seek refund in
accordance with Section 18 read with Rule 15.
18.

Therefore, this Authority is of the considered opinion that the

Complainants, at their choice, may seek refund but cannot seek interest on
the amount paid as there is no violation of the Agreement executed by the
Respondent yet.
19.

A detailed perusal of the Agreement executed by the Respondent in

favour of the Complainant shows that there is no clause for voluntary
cancellation of a flat by the Complainants. Therefore, this Authority has to
rely on the Draft Agreement of Sale as provided under Rule 38 of the Rules
2017. Clause 7.5 of the said Draft Agreement of Sale stipulates that “The
Allottee shall have the right to cancel/withdraw his allotment in the Project only
as provided in the Act: Provided that where the allottee proposes to
cancel/withdraw from the project without any fault of the promoter, the
promoter herein is entitled to forfeit the booking amount paid for the allotment.
The balance amount of money paid by the allottee shall be returned by the
promoter to the allottee within three months of such cancellation or at the time
that the Promoter is able to resell the said Apartment/Plot to another purchaser,
whichever is later.”
20.

In line with the said provision, the Complainants are entitled to refund

of the amounts paid by them minus the booking amount which shall be

6 of 7

forfeited by the Respondent. There is no clarity with respect to the booking
amount paid by each Complainant as the Agreements do not speak about the
same. Therefore, this Authority shall direct the Respondent to ascertain the
same, comply with the directions of the Authority and accordingly submit an
action taken report in this regard.
21.

Point II is answered accordingly.

E. Directions of the Authority:
20.

In light of the above discussion, the Authority vide its powers under

Section 37 and 38, issues the following directions:
i.

Respondent is liable for penalty under Section 59 for violation of
Section 3 and is therefore, directed to pay penalty of Rs. 6,06,520/payable within 30 (thirty) days in favor of TG RERA FUND through
a Demand Draft or online payment to A/c No. 50100595798191,
HDFC Bank, IFSC Code: HDFC0007036; and

ii.

Respondent is directed to refund the amounts paid by the
Complainants to the Complainants within a period of 90 days in
accordance with Rule 16 of the Rules, 2017 excluding the booking
amount paid by each Complainant and submit a compliance report
to this Authority, failing which penalty shall be imposed on the
Respondent in accordance with Section 63 of the Act, 2016.

21.

In light of the above directions, the present complaint is disposed of. 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

7 of 7