Order Complaint No. 27 of 2024

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Corum:

Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.), Hon’ble Chairperson
Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu, Hon’ble Member
Sri K. Srinivasa Rao, Hon’ble Member
01st March 2025
Complaint No.27 of 2024

Eeli Hari babu
…COMPLAINANT
And

M/s SK Constructions rep by BR Mohan Reddy

…RESPONDENT

This present complaint, came up on 06.09.2024 before us for hearing in the presence
of Complainant appeared in person and for Respondent Sri BR. Mohan Reddy and upon
hearing the arguments on both sides and the matter reserved over for the consideration till
this date, this Authority passes the following.
ORDER
2.

The 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"), alleging commission of violation and contravening of the
provisions of the said Act and Rules and sought for the appropriate reliefs against the
Respondent.

A.

The Brief facts of the case as per allegations/averments contained in the

complaint are as follow:
3.

That the complainant purchased a semi-finished Flat No. 301 from the

Respondent/Developer at Padmasreekar Icon, Survey Number 263, Gajularamaram-1,
Qutbullapur, Medchal-Malkajgiri, 500055,which came to its share.
4.

That the complainant and other flat owners have been facing persistent issues. Despite

numerous assurances and promises made by the builder, Mr. B.R. Mohan Reddy, Managing
1 of 11

Director of SK Constructions & Developers, several essential facilities and amenities that
were obligated have not been provided.
5.

That the Respondent along with landowner had made false statements through

advertisement banners, claiming that amenities such as Play Area, Gym, and Multi-Purpose
Hall would be provided. However, to his and remaining owners dismay, none of these
facilities have been made available, despite repeated requests and reminders to the respondent
and landlord.
6.

That the absence of these basic amenities not only violates the terms promised by SK

Constructions & Developers but also significantly impacts the quality of life of the residents.
It is unfair and unacceptable that we, as flat owners, are being deprived of the amenities that
were promised to us at the time of purchase by the Respondent and landlord.
7.

That the complainant, along with other flat owners, attempted to address these

concerns directly with the Respondent and the landlord, but their grievances have been met
with indifference and disregard.
8.

That the Respondent and landlord had collected Rs. 3 lakhs and above from himself

and the remaining flat owners respectively solely for providing amenities. That they also
clearly mentioned that Manjeera water connection would also be provided to the building by
the time of possession. That during the time of purchase, the builder and landlord conveyed
that each flat owner must contribute a minimum of Rs. 5,000–10,000 for providing manjera
water. However, the builder and landlord are now completely denying their obligations and
have informed all owners that they are not going to provide Manjeera water connection to the
building.
9.

That the complainant, along with other flat owners, approached HMWSSB,

Gajularamaram, to obtain an estimate for a new manjeera connection. On that the officers of
the said authority have stated that the water connection should be provided by the builder
himself. This was conveyed to the Respondent and the landlord. But they are still giving
reluctant answers on the Manjera water connection
10.

That many flat owners are suffering from sanitary issues, including water leakages

from the walls. Additionally, paint layers have been damaged due to poor-quality painting.
Despite multiple requests from flat owners, the Respondent has refused to rectify these
issues.
2 of 11

11.

That many flat owners have already occupied their flats, and the Occupancy

Certificate (OC) was granted to them on 6th May 2023. However, the basic amenities are still
not provided.
B. Relief sought:
a. To direct the Respondent to fulfil its obligations regarding providing of amenities and
rectification of the defects.
b. Granting such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Authority may deem fit and proper
in the interest of justice.
C. Reply on behalf of the Respondent:
12.

The Respondent in its reply contended that the Complainant has filed the complaint

with false allegations.
13.

But however, the respondent has admitted that the Complainant had approached it for

purchasing of a flat. That at that time they had hand provided all relevant title documents and
plans, that after reviewing them, the Complainant, after having beensatisfied with the title,
plans, and its experience, decided to proceed with the purchase that after mutual negotiations,
Flat No. 301 was allotted to the Complainant from its share in lieu of development rights
granted to it by the landlords under agreed terms and conditions as per the specifications and
brochure. That the Complainant had willingly purchased the flat from it.
14.

That it had clearly specified the amenities and features that would be provided to flat

buyers that no additional assurances or promises were made beyond those specified in the
agreement and brochure. Furthermore, all agreed-upon specifications, as per the Agreement
of Sale and the brochure, have been duly provided, and no pending works remained. That
theComplainant has purchased the flat from Respondent No.1 with full awareness of these
terms.
15.

That at no point of time it had promised or given assurance to the complaint with

regard to play area, gym, or multipurpose hall/office room. When the Complainant and other
flat buyers requested to provide these additional facilities, they were informed that the
sanctioned plan did not include such amenities. That providing them would constitute a
violation of the sanctioned plan. However, due to persistent requests from flat owners,
3 of 11

including the Complainant, a common understanding was reached on 09.10.2022, wherein it
was agreed that a gym room, function hall, and children’s play area would be provided at the
risk and cost of the flat ownersthat to after obtaining of a “No Objection” Certificate
(NOC)/Occupancy Certificate. The Complainant and remaining owners accepted these terms.
Subsequently, in February 2024, the Complainant and other flat owners have provided
necessary requirements and estimates, after which it had promptly completed the requested
amenities, including a gym room with equipment, a function hall, a children’s play area with
equipment, and an office room with 35 chairs.
16.

That while so the Complainant is now falsely alleging that it had failed to complete or

provide the agreed-upon basic amenities. In reality, it has fulfilled all contractual obligations.
Additionally, the agreement concerning the gym, children’s play area, and function hall was
technically invalid as these facilities were not part of the original sanctioned plan. They were
provided solely due to the persistent requests of the flat owners, at their own risk.
17.

That the claim that it has failed to provide amenities is baseless. That all grievances

and requests from the Complainant and other flat owners have been addressed, and no works
are pending.
18.

Regarding the provision of Manjeera water, the amount collected for amenities did not

include expenses for obtaining Manjeera water connection. But however, it had committed to
provide necessary provisions for such a connection. It was clearly communicated to all flat
owners that they would have to contribute proportionately once the concerned authorities
provided an estimate. This was reiterated during the meeting on 09.10.2022, where all flat
owners, including the Complainant, agreed to contribute as per the authorities' estimates after
obtaining the NOC. That now it has obtained the NOC from GHMC and has requested flat
owners to make their contributions to secure the water connection. That for the unsold flats,
it(Respondent) has agreed to bear the proportionate cost.
19.

That it is surprising that the Complainant now claims that, based on the suggestion of

an HMWSSB officer, the builder is responsible for providing the Manjeera water connection.
Any such provision must be in accordance with the agreement, specifications, and brochure
but not based on an external party's suggestion. Even in the 09.10.2022 meeting, flat owners
agreed to contribute proportionately for the connection.

4 of 11

20.

Occupancy has already been granted to all the flat owners, from 01.04.2022 to

31.10.2022, it (Respondent) bore the maintenance charges without collecting them from the
flat owners. Thereafter, individual flat owners, along with It (Respondent) for unsold flats,
have been paying maintenance charges.
21.

That the Complainant has submitted outdated photographs in an attempt to mislead

the Hon’ble Authority to and garner sympathy. That there is no deviation in the compound
wall’s construction, as evident from the occupancy certificate issued by GHMC. Had there
been any deviation, GHMC would not have issued the Occupancy Certificate. The unfinished
plastering seen in the submitted photographs pertains to the exterior of the compound wall,
which has since been completed. The Respondent has submitted Photograph No.1 as
evidence.
22.

The rainwater harvesting pit area has been completed and is covered with a grill as a

safety measure. Photograph No.2 supports this claim. The children’s play area was
documented during construction, and photographs were taken. The facility is now fully
completed, as evidenced by Photograph No.3. The gym room, play area, and function
hall/office room have all been provided, as shown in Photographs No.4, 5, and 6. Minor air
cracks developed due to the neighboring land being excavated, which caused the issue.
However, the cracks have been rectified, as shown in Photographs No.7 and 8. Regarding the
paintwork, discoloration occurred due to residents’ weekly floor cleaning, leading to water
absorption. This issue has also been addressed with repainting. There are no damages or
leakages in the internal walls. The Complainant has not specified which flat allegedly has
such issues, and no pending works remain.
23.

That it (Respondent) requests this Hon’ble Authority to appoint a Commissioner to

inspect the premises and provide a report, as the Complainant has submitted misleading,
outdated photographs for all these reasons the respondent has and so also prayed to dismiss
the Complaint with exemplary costs.
24.

While so during the course of hearing of the case on hand, this authority, by orders

dated 25.06.2024 has ordered the technical team of the authority , TG RERA consisting of the
technical team and Tahsildar to inspect the project "Padmasreekar Icon," located at Survey
No. 263, Gajularamaram-1, Quthballapur, MedchalMalkajgiri District, bearing TG RERA
Registration No. P02200002692, and to submit its report of inspection immediately.
5 of 11

Accordingly, the technical team comprising of a Technical Engineer and a Tahsildar,
accompanied by the complainant in this case and complainants in the remaining similar
casesand as also the respondent, inspected the above said project, that it is to say a residential
apartment complex consisting of 1 cellar, stilt, and 5 upper floors, spanning a total of 35 flats
across 1651.71 sq. m.
25.

Accordingly the technical team inspected the project and submitted its inspection

report, with its observations which are as follows: i.

Manjeera water connection, essential for residential use, has not been provided for the
apartment

ii.

Respondent has provided a gym with the necessary equipment, an unfurnished
multipurpose hall in the cellar, and a play area on the ground floor.

iii.

That with regard to quality and pending issues it has observed that: a)

The terrace waterproofing plaster has deteriorated in certain locations,
attributable to substandard quality of the material and workmanship, which
needed to be rectified under qualified technical supervision by the builder.

b) No security peepholes have been installed on the main doors of the flats.
c) Despite the builder provided water outlet provisions and riser band in the floor
to restrict the flow of rain water in main corridor coming from corridor
openings, particularly during the monsoon. Hence the residents have requested
that window shutters be installed to mitigate this issue.
d) Signs of dampness and peeling of putty paint were noted in the toilet walls in
flat no. 506 and so also in flat Nos. 301, 302, 304, 402, 205, 105, 203, and 303.
Necessary grouting work is advised in these areas to prevent further
deterioration.
e) Cracks in the wall adjacent to the main doors of the apartments and the
compound walls were observed. Although some inner cracks in the compound
wall have been repaired, further measures are required to ensure structural
integrity.
f) The builder of rectification of plumbing works in the kitchen in Flat No. 402,
the patchwork with tiles remains incomplete, necessitating attention to restore
uniformity.

6 of 11

g) The inspection also highlighted drainage issues on the cellar ramp. Due to the
absence of a proper drain, rainwater accumulates on the cellar floor, creating a
potential hazard. It was recommended that a cross drain with appropriate
grating be constructed to channel rainwater to a designated collection point,
from where it can be pumped out efficiently.
26.

Upon careful examination of the above detailed inspection findings, this Authority

directed the respondent builder to undertake immediate rectification of the aforementioned
deficiencies, particularly regarding the structural and quality defects observed in the project.
The respondent builder was also instructed to complete pending works in coordination with
the residential association, ensuring that all outstanding issues were resolved to the
satisfaction of the residents.
27.

Taking in to consideration the allegations made by the complaint in the present case

and so also in the remaining similar complaints and the submission made by the respondent
in the counter, rejoinder filed by the Complainant, the inspection report and as also the
arguments advanced on behalf of both sides the points that arise for consideration are as
follows.
1. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs sought?
2. Whether the Respondent has violated the provisions of the RE(R&D) Act? If so,
to what extent?
Point 1:
28.

The main contentions raised by the Complainant and remaining complainants are that

amenities and facilities promised at the time of purchase, including, inter alia, a play area,
gym, multi-purpose hall, and Manjeera water connection, have not been provided by the
Respondent even after collecting the additional sum of 3,00,000/-, accompanied by an extra
contribution ranging from ₹5,000 to ₹10,000 for the Manjeera water connection from him
and reaming flat owners. Despite the issuance of the Occupancy Certificate on 6 May 2023,
these amenities remain incomplete.
29.

On the other hand, as can be gathered from the reply, the contentions of the

respondentis that the complainant after going through the specifications and Boucher and

7 of 11

having been satisfied with the workmanship of the Respondent has purchased above said flat.
That at no point of time it has given any further assurances nor made any promises to the
complainant herein and the remaining flat owners that itself along with landlord would
provide a play area, gym and, multipurpose hall, office room except the agreed specifications
and the specifications mentioned in the Boucher. That they have provided all the
specifications as per the agreement of sale and brochure and that there were no pending
works. That while so the complainant and the remaining flat owners requested them to
provide the above said additional provisions such as a gym room, play area and multipurpose hall/office room. That on that they drew the attention of the complainant and other
remaining flat owners to the specifications and the Boucher specifications and informed them
that providing of the said additional provisions would be against the sanctioned plan, since
there was no provision for providing such amenities. That on persistent request made by the
complainant and remaining flat owners, a common understanding was arrived at on 09-102022 for provision of the said additional amenities but however, at the risk of the flat owners
and that too after obtaining of NOC that on that the complainant and remaning flat owners
agreed for the same. Thereafter the complainant and other remaining flat owners gave the
estimates in respect of the additional amenities to them. Only in the month of Feb 2024 that
immediately thereafter they have provided the above said additional amenities by completing
all works. While so the complainant and remaining flat owners have filed the rejoinder
wherein they have disputed the pleas put forth by it(respondents) in the counter. Then the
technical team of this authority was directed to inspect the site and submit inspection report.
Accordingly the technical team inspected the site and submitted the report along with their
observations as detiled herein above in para no. 25.
30.

Keeping in view the afore detailed rival claims and contentions it is observed by the

authoritythat though the advertising material of the builder/landowner contained reference of
amenities such as a children's play park, multipurpose hall, gym, and solar fencing but there
was no reference about this amenities in the Agreement of Sale, Sale Deeds, or the sanctioned
plan obtained by the Respondent/builder for the concerned project. When that is so the
Authority is of the view that the complainant cannot be granted relief for such amenities, as
the sanctioned plan demonstrates no such provision for the gym, play area or multipurpose
hall. The complainant and the remaining owners themselves acknowledged that these
amenities were constructed following the issuance of the occupancy certificate dated
06.03.2023. While so the sale deed dated 12.09.2021 submitted by the complainants,
8 of 11

indicates that the possession was handed over to the complainant in the year 2021 and so also
as can be seen from the discussion made in forgoing para it will be clear that the complainant
and renaming flat owners were aware of the deviations from the sanctioned plan. When that
is so this Authority is precluded from granting relief as prayed for to the complainant that
extends beyond what is stipulated in the sanctioned plan, which was not permitted or
referenced in the sale deed or agreement.
31.

With regard to the Manjeera water connection, the complainant has reiterated that the

Respondent had collected an amount of ₹3,00,000 from each individual flat owner towards
amenities and had collected further amount ranging from Rs. 5000 – 10000 /- for providing
Manjeera water connection. However, upon perusal of the evidence available on record, it is
evident that no such assurances or financial obligations pertaining to amenities and Manjeera
water connection are reflected in the Agreement of Sale, Sale Deed, or even in the
promotional banners. Nevertheless, during the course of the proceedings, Respondent
unequivocally assured the complainant and this Authority that the Manjeera water connection
would be provided. In light of this assurance, this Authority is of the considered view that the
Respondent would adhere to this commitment made during the course of the proceedings and
ensure that the provision of the Manjeera water connection shall be provided as urged by the
Complainants and remaining flat owners.
32.

Now coming to the rectification of specific structural defects within the project, in the

light of the provision of Section 14(3) of the RE(R&D) Act, it shall be the duty of the
respondent as promoter to rectify such defects.
33. It can be noticed from the inspection report submitted by the technical team of this
authority

that

several

defects

in

the

project

necessitate

rectification

by

the

Respondent/builder/promoter, which are detailed and mentioned inpara no 25 here in above.
34.

Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed in the

herein above, the authority is of the considered view that the complainant and remaining flat
owners are entitled for getting the above pointed out structural defects rectified by the
respondent. The point no.1 is answered accordingly.

9 of 11

Point 2:
35.

As is evident from the material available on record this authority, finds and observes

that the Respondent has deviated from the sanctioned plan obtained from the competent
authority (vide no. 1/C26/16930/2019 dated 23rd November 2019) by constructing amenities
such as gym, play area and multipurpose hall. Further, as is evident from the
availablematerial on record before this authority, the Respondent had advertised about the
above detailed facilities in signage that did not conform to the sanctioned plan. In this context
on a reading of the section 14(1) of the RE(R&D) Act it will be clear that the said provision
imposes an obligation upon the promoter to develop and complete the project in strict
accordance with the sanctioned plan, layout plans, and specifications approved by the
competent authorities. But however in the case on hand it is evident that the Respondent had
failed to adhere to these provisions and there by violated the provisions of Section 14 of the
RE(R&D) Act, which was confirmed by this Authority. It is pertinent to note that this
Authority has already imposed a penalty on the Respondent for an identical violation under
the same project. In view of the clear contravention of Section 14(1) of the Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, this authority in the exercise of its powers under
Section 61 of the said Act, has already levied a penalty of Rs. 4,50,645/- (Rupees Four lakh
fifty thousand six hundred and forty-five only) on the Respondent in Case No. 21 of 2024 on
the file of this authority.Therefore the authority is of considered view that no more further
penalty needed to be imposed on the Respondent in the present case on hand.
36.

While so however as admitted by the Respondent there are still unsold flats in the

concerned project. In the said circumstances, the Respondent has to be restrained from
advertising any amenities or facilities that do not adhere to the sanctioned plan obtained from
the competent authority. The point under the discussion is answered accordingly.
G. Directions of the Authority:
37.

Accordingly in the result, the authority hereby issues this order and, following

directives under Section 37 r/w Section 34(f) of the RE(R&D) Act to the respondent herein
so as to ensure compliance with the obligations imposed upon it within 60 days from the date
of this order:
i. Rectify all identified defects as mentioned in para 34 of this Order.

10 of 11

ii. Provide the Manjeera water connection to all apartments in the project as
initially promised and for which payments have already been collected from
the flat owners.
iii. The respondent is further directed to submit a detailed compliance report to
this Authority within the stipulated thirty (30) days, outlining the actions taken
to adhere to this order.
iv. Respondent is further restrained not

to advertise any such amenities or

facilities that do not adhere to the sanction plan obtained from the competent
authority and directed to adhere to the sanctioned plan.
38. Respondent is hereby informed that failure to comply with this order shall attract Section
63 of the RE(R&D) act.
39. The complaint is disposed of with these directions. There shall be 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

11 of 11