Order Complaint No. 365 of 2025

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO. 365 OF 2025
Dated: 3rd February 2026
Quorum:

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

Syed Ayesha
(H. No: 12-11-1004/B, Boudhanagar, Warasiguda,
Secunderabad- 500 061)
…Complainant
Versus
M/s. Apoorva Infra Rep by Katta Prassanna Babu
(R/o. H. No. 2-190, New Leela Residence,
Green Park Avenue, Behind Surabhi Hotel,
Suchitra circle, Kompally Road, Secunderabad – 500067)
…Respondent
The present matters filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing before this
Authority in the presence of the Complainant in person, and learned Counsel for Respondent,
M. Balasubramanyam Sandeep pilli, upon hearing submissions made by both parties, and the
matter reserved over for consideration till this date, this Authority passes the present Complaint
ORDER:
2.

The present Complaint has been filed by the Complainant under Section 31 of the Real

Estate (Regulation & 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”) seeking appropriate relief(s) against the Respondents.
A. Facts of the Case:
3.

The Complainant submitted that the Complainant purchased a plot in the project titled

"Swaminarayan Eco Township" promoted by Apoorva Infra, situated at Undrugonda,
Chivemla Mandal, Suryapet District 508213 and the said project was registered under RERA
Registration No. P01900003203, with a committed completion date of 24/05/2023, as per the
RERA registration certificate. Despite the lapse of over two years from the promised date, as
Page 1 of 9

---

There has been negligible development on the site, and the promised infrastructure,

such as internal roads, electricity connections, water supply, layout demarcations, and other
civic amenities, is nonexistent.
5.

Furthermore, the promoter has collected the full consideration amount from the

Complainant and executed the Registered sale deed for Plot No. 752 on 09/02/2022.
B. Relief sought: 6. Accordingly, the Complainant sought for the following reliefs:
I. Direct the Respondent to pay the monthly interest for the delayed period in accordance with
the provisions of the RERA Act, 2016.
II. Immediate intervention in the matter and conduct a detailed investigation into the status of
the project and if found guilty of violation, take punitive actions against the Respondent in
accordance with the RERA Act 2016 in the interest of allottees.
C. Counter filed by the Respondent
7.

The Respondent submitted that he has been in the real estate sector for a long time and

successfully completed multiple projects across various states without any complaints, and he
strictly adheres to the law. The Respondent undertook the development of land situated in the
said project and obtained permission from DTCP and registered the project with RERA vide.
P01900003203, and the project is named as “Swami Narayana Township" by Apoorva Infra,
and there has been a significant development, such as levelling of land, demarcation of plots
(Partially).
8.

The complainant approached the respondent for the purchase of said plot in the

Respondent project and paid the full sale consideration, and got registered the plot No. 752,
admeasuring 333.33 Sq. Yds and Plot No.753 admeasuring 183.33 sq. yds vide Registered Sale
Deed No. 2701/2022 while a registered Sale Deed has been duly executed in favour of the
Complainant, possession has been handed over, and the essential obligations pertaining to the
individual unit have been substantially fulfilled, certain external/common area works and
amenities are partially pending due to reasons beyond the immediate control of the Respondent,
The unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdowns during 2020-2022, stalled
Page 2 of 9

---

During the COVID-19 pandemic. The Landlords have suddenly raised a dispute, and,

as locals, have not allowed the Respondent or their management to complete the work, which
was not foreseen by the respondent, and the said delay was not wilful or negligent, and are
being addressed on priority. However, to the extent of the complainant's plot, the delay did not
cause any damage or loss to the complainant, did not render the unit uninhabitable, and
therefore does not constitute a total failure of delivery under RERA.
10.

The Respondent submitted that the Complainant voluntarily executed the Sale Deed,

which includes an acknowledgement of the stage of completion, and the Complainant also took
possession of the unit without raising contemporaneous objections, indicating acceptance of
the existing status, and the Respondent has never abandoned the project. Development work is
ongoing, and the Respondent is committed to completing the project and handing over
possession to allottees, including the complainant, at the earliest. The Respondent is making
bona fide efforts to complete all remaining works and has already undertaken steps to complete
the pending infrastructure in a phased manner. Timelines for completion of pending items can
be shared with the Hon'ble Authority and Since possession has been granted and the unit is
useable/Saleable, and absence of any proven hardship or damages suffered by the Complainant,
no claim for compensation under Section 18(1) of the RE(R&D) Act may be granted under
natural Justice, and for uplift of faith in law and Authority.
11.

Furthermore, the Respondent undertakes to complete the pending works within a

defined timeframe and is willing to submit a revised project schedule for the completion of
amenities, in line with the project registration details, at the earliest.
12.

The Respondent further prayed to take note of ongoing works, dismiss the claim and

grant a reasonable time to complete the project and pass any other order as deemed fit in the
interest of justice.
D. Rejoinder Filed by the Complainant
13.

The Complainant, in her rejoinder, submitted that the Respondent/Developer is under

an obligation to complete the project on or before 24th May 2023, as per the timelines stipulated
in the RERA Registration. However, the Respondent has failed to fulfil even the most basic
requirements of a project, like demarcation of plots, roadways, drainage lines, and electricity
Page 3 of 9

---

The Respondent's claim of significant development is false and not at all true. In the

ground reality, there is no proper demarcation of plots, no roadways, no drainage lines, and no
electricity lines. On the ground, the project remains in the same incomplete condition as in
2021. The Respondent himself has admitted that the works are still pending and are required
to be taken up, which clearly means the project is not developed and the Respondent is wrongly
trying to take the shelter of Covid-19 as an excuse to hide his wilful delay in completing the
project within the RERA timelines, i.e., before May 2023. All Covid-related restrictions were
lifted by June 2022, and construction activities had been resumed across all the states, including
Telangana. There was ample time to complete the works before the target time of May 2023.
Still, no meaningful effort is being made to complete the project. This clearly shows that the
delay is not due to Covid-19 or any other reasonable cause, but rather to the Respondent's own
negligence and willful inaction.
15.

The Respondent's contention that the development was affected due to an internal

dispute with the landowners is not a valid defence under the Act. As per Clause 2 of the Sale
Deed, Vendor No. 5 (the developer) has taken exclusive responsibility for the development and
provision of all amenities. Therefore, the buyers cannot be made to suffer or be victimised for
any internal disputes, delays, negligence, or shortfalls on the part of the developer.
16.

The Respondent claims that the delay did not cause any damage or loss to the

Complainant, and that possession was already taken. This statement is completely false and not
at all valid under the RE(R&D) Act, 2016. What has been given is only a paper possession
through registration of the plot, but there is no actual physical usability and even no basic
amenities such as roadways, electricity lines and drainage taken up and completed, and the said
plot is in an uninhabitable condition and as per Section 18(1) of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016. The
buyer has every right to claim compensation for the delay in development, and the Complainant
submitted that registration of the plot alone is not enough; without basic infrastructure, it cannot
be treated as physical possession under the Act.
17.

The Complainant submits that due to the delay in the development of the project, the

Complainant has suffered financial loss, Physical usability loss, and Opportunity cost, and
Page 4 of 9

---

After deliberating upon the contentions of the parties, the issue that arises for

consideration by the Authority is whether the Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed
for? If yes, to what extent?
F. Observations of the Authority:
19.

From the documentary material placed on record, it stands established that the

Complainant purchased Plot No. 704/A, admeasuring 166.66 Sq. Yards or equivalent to 139.3
Sq. meters in the layout known as Swaminarayan Eco Township, developed by M/s. Apoorva
Infra is situated in part of Survey Nos. 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 175, 176, 179, 181,
182 of Undrugonda revenue village, Chivemla Mandal, Suryapet District, Telangana State .
The transaction was duly completed through a registered Sale Deed bearing Document No.
117075/2021 dated 06.12.2021 at SRO, Suryapet. The said Sale Deed remains valid and
undisputed, and no allegation of fraud, suppression, or vitiating circumstances has been raised
by either party.
20.

The Complainant has stated that she paid a total sale consideration, and the said plot

was registered in her favour through a sale deed, and the project was scheduled to be completed
by May 24, 2023, as per the RERA registration. It is the Complainant’s case that the
development remains incomplete. The Respondent, in its submissions, submits that he is
making bona fide efforts to complete all remaining works, and the delay was neither intentional
nor mala fide, but attributable to circumstances beyond its control and the project commenced
with due approvals, and development work is in progress.
21.

The Respondents, however, unequivocally admitted that development at the project

remains incomplete. It attributes the delay to multiple external factors, including landowner
disputes and the Covid-19 pandemic etc., The Respondent reiterates that despite earnest efforts,
these impediments have hindered progress. Nevertheless, such submissions do not alter the
admitted fact that the promised development works remain pending to date.

Page 5 of 9

---

The Respondent has sought to justify the delay by attributing it to the Covid-19

pandemic. However, on careful perusal of the record, it is evident that the Respondent obtained
RERA registration in August 2021 and entered into transactions well after the pandemic. The
plea that development could not proceed due to Covid-19 restrictions, or that landowners
restricted access during the post-pandemic period, is vague, unsubstantiated, and untenable.
The Respondent, being fully aware of the prevailing circumstances, cannot take shelter under
such general assertions.
23.

It is a settled principle that once a promoter has chosen to register a project and enter

into binding contractual commitments with allottees, he does so with full knowledge of the
risks, constraints, and challenges of the market. At the time of entering into the Agreement
with the present Complainant, the Respondent was already aware of the Covid-related
disruptions, as well as the Government notifications granting moratoriums for project
completion timelines. Despite this knowledge, the Respondent chose to provide a specific
assurance of delivery by May 2023. In view of the above, the stand taken by the Respondent
that the delay was caused due to the Covid-19 pandemic is found to be untenable and
unjustifiable, and the same is hereby rejected.
24.

Accordingly, the plea of Covid-19 as a force majeure event is wholly unsustainable in

the present case. The Respondent, having voluntarily undertaken contractual and statutory
obligations after the pandemic period, cannot retrospectively attribute the delay to Covid-19.
The reliance placed on the pandemic as a defence is therefore rejected.
25.

Further, this Authority is of the considered view that disputes with landowners cannot

be treated as circumstances beyond the control of the promoter so as to defeat or dilute the
statutory rights of the allottee. The RE(R&D) Act casts a clear and non-delegable obligation
upon the promoter to ensure the timely completion and delivery of the project, and internal
conflicts, commercial disagreements, or title-related disputes among promoters or with
landowners cannot be used as a shield to justify prolonged delay. Further, this Authority finds
that no cogent material has been placed on record to demonstrate any concrete or bona fide
steps taken by the Respondent to safeguard the interests of the Complainant or to mitigate the
delay. There is a conspicuous absence of any evidence showing revised completion schedules,
binding commitments, or proactive measures aimed at restoring confidence of the allottee. On
the contrary, the conduct of the Respondent indicates a passive approach, wherein the
Respondent appears to have taken a back seat and allowed the alleged disputes to subsist
Page 6 of 9

---

In such circumstances, this Authority is unable to accept the Respondent’s plea as a

valid justification for the delay. The statutory entitlements of the Complainant under the Real
Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 cannot be rendered illusory or defeated on
account of the Respondent’s internal disputes, inaction, or failure to discharge its obligations
in a time-bound manner.
27.

The Authority further observes that although physical possession of the plot may have

been delivered contemporaneously with execution of the sale deed, delivery of possession
without completion of development works does not amount to fulfilment of the promoter’s
statutory obligations. The project’s RERA registration expressly stipulated 24.05.2023 as the
completion date, by which the promoter was required to complete all development obligations,
including internal roads, electricity, drainage, water facilities, and other approved
infrastructure. Mere delivery of an undeveloped plot does not absolve the promoter of liability.
under the RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
28.

It is not disputed by the Respondent that the project has not been developed as per the

agreed timelines. On the contrary, the Respondent has candidly admitted that development has
been hindered due to disputes with landowners. In a situation where the project remains
incomplete and the promoter has failed to honour the timelines committed under the
Agreement.
29.

Section 18(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016

unequivocally mandates that where a promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession
of an apartment, plot, or building by the date specified in the agreement for sale, the promoter
shall be liable, at the option of the allottee, either to return the entire amount received along
with interest at the prescribed rate, or, where the allottee does not intend to withdraw from the
project, to pay interest for every month of delay till the handing over of possession. In the
present case, the Complainant has exercised his statutory option to withdraw from the project.
Consequently, the Respondent is bound by law to refund the amount received along with
applicable interest, and any attempt to deny or delay such entitlement is contrary to the express
mandate of the RE(R&D) Act.
30.

Accordingly, in exercise of powers under Section 18(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation

and Development) Act, 2016, this Authority directs Respondent to complete all pending
Page 7 of 9

---

The Respondent shall further be liable to pay interest Complainant, calculated at the

prescribed rate under Section 18(1) of the RE(R&D) Act, from 24.05.2023 until such time as
the final layout approval is obtained, all the promised development works are fully completed,
and the plot is handed over to the Complainant as a fully developed plot strictly in accordance
with the sanctioned plan.
32.

It is also noted that the RERA Registration obtained by the Respondent in the year 2021

was valid only up to May 2023. On verification of the records, it is found that the Respondent
has neither applied for nor obtained any extension of registration from this Authority.
Considering the fact that the project remains incomplete and no occupancy certificate has been
obtained, the Respondent is hereby directed to initiate steps for completion of the project, and
the said project shall be completed within the stipulated time.
33.

The Respondent is further prohibited from advertising, marketing, offering for sale,

inviting purchasers, or effecting any sale transactions in respect of any plot within the said
project until the extension is obtained from the RE(R&D) Act 2016 before this authority any
act in contravention of Section 3 of the RE(R&D) Act shall attract penal consequences under
Section 63.
34.

In view of the lapse of registration and the continued non-completion of the project, the

Respondent is directed to forthwith initiate necessary steps for completion of the project in
accordance with statutory provisions.
G. Directions of the Authority:
35.

In view of the detailed observations made hereinabove and upon careful consideration

of the pleadings, documents placed on record, the submissions made by both parties, and
applicable provisions of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016, this Authority is of the considered opinion
that the Complainant is entitled to the following reliefs:
i.

The Respondent is directed to pay interest on the amount paid by the Complainant to
the Respondent, i.e.,

Rs. 5,83,310/- for the period of delay in completing the

development of the plot, calculated from date of completion as per RERA registration
Page 8 of 9

---

Further, in view of the lapse of the project registration and the admitted non-completion
of the project, the Respondent–Promoter is directed to forthwith initiate all necessary
steps for completion of the project strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plans and
applicable statutory provisions.

iii.

Further, the Respondent is directed to initiate steps for obtaining extension of
registration under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act,
2016, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of this Order.

iv.

Pending grant of such extension, the Respondent is restrained from advertising,
marketing, offering for sale, inviting purchasers, or effecting any sale or allotment of
plots in respect of the said project. Any act in contravention of this direction shall render
the Respondent liable for penal action under Section 63 of the Real Estate (Regulation
and Development) Act, 2016.

36.

As a result, the complaint is disposed of accordingly. 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

Page 9 of 9

---