Order Complaint No. 1763,1688 and1762 of 2023

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Dated this 13thday of November 2023
Quorum:

Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.), Hon’ble Chairperson
Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu, Hon’ble Member
Sri K. Srinivasa Rao, Hon’ble Member
Complaint No. 1763 of 2023
Complaint no.1688 of 2023
Complaint No 1762 of 2023

Mula Satyanaryana
(1-9-19/134/1&2, Ramnagar Main Road, near Meeseva office- Hyderabad – 500020)
…Complainant
Versus
M/s Swayam Homes represented by Vantala Jangaiah Yadav
(Resp by Managing director Sri V.Jangaiah Yadav, R/o Madhusudhan Apartments, flat
no.103-104, Street 5, Habsiguda – Hyderabad)
…Respondent

The present complaints were taken up for hearing on 13.11.2024 in the presence of
SriThirupati, representative for the Respondent. However, there was no representation on
behalf of the Complainant. Upon hearing the submissions made by the Respondent, the
matters were reserved for orders. Accordingly, the Authority now proceeds to pass this
common order.
ORDER
2.

The Complainant has filed complaint on hand under Section 31 of the Real Estate

(Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the "RE(R&D) Act"),
read with Rule 34(1) of the Telangana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules,
2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules"), alleging non-payment of brokerage/commission
by the promoter (Respondent) to the Real Estate Agent (Complainant) on certain plot sales
and seeking direction to enforce such payment.
3.

The issue that falls for consideration before this Authority is whether a complaint filed

by a real estate agent claiming commission from a promoter in respect of alleged sales is

1 of 3

maintainable under the jurisdiction of this Authority as contemplated under the RE(R&D)
Act, 2016.
4.

It is pertinent to refer to the preamble of the Real Estate (Regulation and

Development) Act, 2016, which clearly delineates the object and purpose of the enactment. It
reads:
“An Act to establish the Real Estate Regulatory Authority for regulation and
promotion of the real estate sector and to ensure sale of plot, apartment or building,
as the case may be, or sale of real estate project, in an efficient and transparent
manner and to protect the interest of consumers in the real estate sector…”

5.

A combined reading of the preamble, the scheme of the Act, and the substantive

provisions therein makes it abundantly clear that the legislative intent of the RE(R&D) Act is
primarily

consumer-focusedaimed

at

protecting

the

rights

and

interests

of

allottees/homebuyers and ensuring transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the
functioning of promoters and real estate agents vis-à-vis the consumers.
6.

In the present case, the entire grievance arises out of adispute between a real estate

agent and a promoter regarding alleged brokerage/commission on plot sales. The RE(R&D)
Act does not create a statutory right in favour of real estate agents for enforcement of
brokerage or commission through this Authority. Nor does it impose any statutory obligation
on promoters to pay brokerage under this Act.
7.

This Authority, being a creature of statute, is bound by the limitations of jurisdiction

conferred upon it. No provision of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016, nor the Rules framed thereunder,
confer jurisdiction upon the Authority to adjudicate disputes relating to commission claims
between promoters and real estate agents.
8.

The dispute raised by the Complainant appears to be purely contractual in nature, and

if at all any grievance exists, the appropriate remedy would lie in approaching a civil court or
competent forum having jurisdiction over alleged disputesnot under the regulatory framework
of this Authority.
9.

Accordingly, as the nature of the grievance does not fall within the jurisdiction of this

Authority under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the captioned
complaints are found to be not maintainable.

2 of 3

10.

In view of the above, all three complaints, i.e., Complaint Nos. 1763 of 2023, 1688 of

2023, and 1762 of 2023, are dismissed as not maintainable for want of jurisdiction under the
RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
11.

No order as to costs.

SdSri. K. Srinivas Rao,
Hon’ble Member
TG RERA

SdSri. Laxmi NaryanaJannu,
Hon’ble Member
TG RERA

SdDr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.),
Hon’ble Chairperson
TG RERA

3 of 3