Order Complaint No. 245 (1) of 2024

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Complaint No. 245 (1) of 2024
9th May, 2025
Corum:

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

Dande Gnaneshwar
(S/o Mallesham, Aged: 44 years, Occ: Govt Teacher, H.No.2-71, ZP High School Road, Choppadandi
Village & Mandal, Karimnagar Dist, Telangana-500055)
…Complainant
Versus
1. M/s Raja Rajeshwari Infra
(Flat No. 103, Kalpataru Residency, Mahangar Estates, Near Prashanth Gas agency, Jeedimetla Village,
Quthbullapur, Medchal, Malkajgiri District- 500055)
2. Illa Ganesh
(Quarter No. A-464, HAL, Balanagar, Hyderbad)
3. Pichchika Suresh
(Flat No. 103, Kalpataru Residency, Mahanagar Estates, Near Prashanth Gas Agency Jeedimetla
Village, Quthbullapur, Medchal, Malkajgiri District- 500055)
…Respondent(s)

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing on 03.04.2025 before
this Authority, none appeared for complainant and the Respondents, further this Authority passes
the following ORDER:
2. This Complaint has been filed 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”) seeking directions from this Authority to take action against the Respondents.
3.

The matter was listed for hearing on 08.01.2025, on the said date, none appeared on behalf

of either the Complainant or the Respondents. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned with a
direction to issue fresh notices to all parties. Thereafter, the complaint was listed again on

Page 1 of 2

05.02.2025 and 11.03.2025. On both these dates as well, there was no representation on behalf of
either side. No written submissions or explanations were received by the Authority
4.

As a matter of due process, the Authority granted a final opportunity and again directed

issuance of fresh notices to both parties.
5.

The matter was finally posted for hearing on 03.04.2025. On the said date also, there was

no appearance from the complainant or any of the respondents. The records reveal that notice
issued to the complainant was served and duly acknowledged. However, notices addressed to the
respondents were returned unserved, bearing the postal endorsement "Insufficient Address".
6.

Despite being aware of the scheduled hearings and having been served with notice, the

complainant has consistently failed to appear before this Authority or to take any steps toward
prosecuting the matter. The repeated non-appearance, without explanation, despite being
afforded multiple opportunities, indicates a clear lack of interest and diligence on the part of the
complainant.
7.

In view of the above factual circumstances and in the interest of judicial discipline and

fairness, this Authority is of the considered opinion that adequate and reasonable opportunities
have already been extended to the complainant. No further purpose will be served by keeping the
matter pending indefinitely.
8.

Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sri. K. Srinivasa Rao,
Hon’ble Member
TG RERA

Sri. Laxmi Naryana Jannu,
Hon’ble Member
TG RERA

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

Page 2 of 2