Order Complaint No. 172 Of 2023

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.172 OF 2023
22nd Day of December, 2023
Corum:

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

Sri Dennis George

…Complainant
Versus

Sri Ravinder Reddy & 2 Ors.

…Respondents

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing on
03.10.2023, 07.11.2023 & 19.12.2023 before this Authority in the presence of the
Complainant in person, and none for the Respondents, and upon hearing the
arguments, this Authority passes the following 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”) requesting appropriate action against
the Respondent Builder.

3.

The Complainant alleges that there is a land fraud of an amount of Rs.36.5

Lakhs that was done by M/s Dhruvitha Sai Enterprises represented through its
Managing Director, Sri Ravinder Reddy and Branch Manager, Sri Sairam by
showing the fake land of “Green Leaves Venture”. He further submits that the
landowner, Sri Ravuri Srinivas Rao who is also partly involved in this fraud has

1 of 4

been cheating people by showing fake lands. He alleged that the Respondents
showed the Complainants land in “Green Leaves Venture” on 18.07.2021 located in
Arutla, Kandi, Sangareddy District. The Respondents allocated the Complainant
along with his wife, sister and two neighbours in Block E bearing Plot Nos.67, 68,
69 and 70 and for the above plots Smt. Manisha Mathew paid 10.50 lakhs, Smt.
Denna George paid 10 Lakhs, Smt. Mounika Saliganti paid 10 Lakhs and Smt.
Pista Devi paid 6 lakhs being a total of Rs.36.5 lakhs out of which Rs.10 lakhs was
paid to the company account i.e., to M/s Dhruvitha Sai Enterprises and the
remaining Rs. 26.5 lakhs to Sri Sai Ram, Branch Manager.

4.

The Complainant submits that in September, 2021, after the Respondents

received full payment, the Respondents delayed the registration process. Later the
Complainants found that the Respondents have fraudulently taken the amounts
from the Complainants. He added that FIR has been registered against the
Respondents which resulted in a refund of Rs.20 Lakhs and the remaining Rs.16.5
Lakhs is yet to be paid by the Respondents to the Complainant, his wife, sister and
neighbours. In lieu thereof, the Complainant prayed for refund of Rs.16.5 Lakhs
along with interest of Rs.2 Lakhs from the Respondent.

5.

This Authority issued notices to the Respondent, however the same was

returned with a remark “no such person”. After directing the Complainant to serve
the Notice, the Complainant filed an acknowledgement before this Authority
without any remarks/signatures from the Respondents. Therefore, it cannot be
said that notice is complete on Respondents. Therefore, there is no appearance on
behalf of the Respondents.

2 of 4

6.

The Complainant has filed an unregistered Memorandum of Understanding

dated 03.08.2021 executed between M/s Dhruvitha Sai Enterprises and Smt. Pista
Devi, an unregistered and undated Memorandum of Understanding executed
between M/s Dhruvitha Sai Enterprises and Smt. S. Mounika, bank transaction
history of

one Sri

Saliganti Mahender,

an unregistered

Memorandum of

Understanding dated 12.09.2021 executed between M/s Dhruvitha Sai Enterprises
and Smt. Denna George and another unregistered Memorandum of Understanding
dated 20.10.2021 executed between M/s Dhruvitha Sai Enterprises and Smt.
Manisha Mathew.

7.

The Complainant also filed pattadar pass book of the land which shows

Ravuri Srinivas Rao being owner of Survey No.80/1/4 and 81/2 in Arutla, Kandi,
Sangareddy District, Telangana along with other documents. After perusal of
documents, more specifically the pattadar pass book as mentioned above, it is
understood that the land, so alleged to have been purchased by the wife of the
Complainant and others is an agricultural land. The said Respondent has made an
unauthorized layout consisting of open plots which falls under agricultural land
use. The Complainant, though not authorized to file a complaint on behalf of his
wife, sister and others has not produced any document to establish that the said
land has been converted by virtue of an N.A. permission or an order granted by
competent Authority to develop the same. In this regard, a judgment of the Ld.
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.U-21 in SC10000227
titled “Mohammad Zain Khan vs. Emnoy Properties India & Ors.” dated 09.10.2019
is relevant and squarely fits the point for consideration before this Authority.

3 of 4

8.

The Hon’ble Tribunal held as under:
“13.(iv).

We have given a thoughtful consideration to the relevant

provisions of the Act. In our view the real estate project as defined
under Section 2(zn) contemplates development of land into plots or
apartments. In case of an agricultural land, as is the case in the instant
appeal, to be designated as a real estate project, necessary
permissions are required to effect the development of the said land.
Compliance of such a requirement also seems essential from the
perspective of provisions under Section 11(4) detailing therein the
obligations of a promoter and Section 4 for mandating the requirements
of certain documents/ permissions necessary for registration of the
project under Section 3 of the Act. In this regard, we note that
Complainant has utterly failed to establish that the said land had all
necessary N.A. or other permissions for its development and for
undertaking its registration as real estate project under the Act.”
(emphasis applied)

9.

Therefore, as the Complainant failed to bring any material on record to prove

the land being converted for development and since no permission has been sought
by the Respondent for the development by the competent authority subsequently, it
cannot be said that the said project comes within the purview of this Authority. In
lieu thereof, the present complaint stands disposed of.

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

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

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

4 of 4