Order Complaint No. 399 of 2023

BEFORE THE
TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
HYDERABAD
COMPLAINT NO.399/2023/TSRERA
Dated: 16th October 2023
Sri Solipuram Mallareddy
Dr Anil Kumar
Sri Adepu Sreenivas

…. Complainant
Versus

M/s Ace Ventures India Private Ltd.
Quorum:

…. Respondents

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

Appearance:

This case came up for a hearing on 11th October 2023
before this Authority. The complainant party present in
person, along with counsel was present and of the
Respondent party present in person along with Counsel.
After hearing the submissions made by the parties, the
Authority passed the following order.
ORDER

The relief sought pertains to the revocation of the registration granted to
the Respondent for the project, ACE Ashaya and Alaya, under Section 7 of
the 2016 Act. The Authority had previously considered this matter and was
of the preliminary opinion that the present complaint is not maintainable.
The observations made are as follows:
2.

It has been observed that this Authority, under the RERA Act,

lacks jurisdiction to address disputes related to land encroachment and
1of 5

unauthorized construction activities undertaken by the Respondents.
Nevertheless, the Authority is of the view that the Complainant should
address

their

concerns

regarding

their

shares

to

the

Hyderabad

Metropolitan Development Authority (herein after referred as HMDA) . The
Complainant did inform the Bench that the same dispute was already
brought before the HMDA, which subsequently delegated the matter to the
Panchayat for a report on the deviations, as per a letter dated 17th
January 2019 (Ref: 15048/HMDA/2008). The Mandal Praja Parishad
conducted an inspection, and a report was submitted regarding the
deviations. This matter is currently pending before various authorities. The
Authority also notes that the Hon’ble High Court, in WAP 150 of 2023, set
aside the order passed in WP no. 650 of 2023, thereby allowing the
construction of the disputed subject, and directed the concerned
Respondents to take action based on the report within 6 weeks. However,
the said matter is also pending before the Panchayat Secretary. This
Authority believes that it has only jurisdiction to protect the interest of the
Project and the interest of the allottees. Therefore, the current complaint is
prima facie not maintainable before this Authority as the said complainant
is neither an allottee nor a promoter/landowner but a mere Neighbour with
the consent of land encroachment.
1. 3.

On 11th October 2023, learned counsel for the parties was

unable to convince the Authority that a dispute between the neighbouring
colony association and the licensed landowner of the project, concerning
land encroachment, falls within the jurisdiction of this Authority. This
Authority's jurisdiction extends only to inter se disputes between the
promoter and allottee. In cases of such disputes, the complainants can
seek recourse with the HMDA or the civil court. It is not denied that the
disputed matter is already pending before the competent authority between
the

present

complainants

and

the

Respondent.

Therefore,

if

the

complainants perceive any form of illegal activity on the part of the
Respondent regarding their right to develop the Real Estate project, they
can seek redress from the Civil Court or the Appropriate Authority. This
Authority cannot grant the relief of revocation under section 7 of the Real
2of 5

Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, as the present Complaint
does not meet the criteria for classification as an "aggrieved person," as
prescribed by the provisions of the 2016 Act. This determination is
grounded in the fact that the Complainant does not fit within any of the
designated categories outlined in the Act, which encompass being an
allottee, an association of allottees, or a voluntary association. The
Complainant, in this instance, has been unable to furnish the Authority
with any evidentiary support or an authorization letter demonstrating her
qualification as an aggrieved person in accordance with the definition
articulated in Section 31 of the RERA Act. Section 31 is reproduced herein
for reference:
31. (1) Any aggrieved person may file a complaint with the Authority or the
adjudicating officer, as the case may be, for any violation or contravention of
the provisions of this Act or the rules and regulations made thereunder
against any promoter allottee or real estate agent, as the case may be.
Explanation. —For the purpose of this sub-section “person” shall include the
association of allottees or any voluntary consumer association registered
under any law for the time being in force.
4.

In

light

of

the

aforementioned

perspective,

the

Authority

concludes that the present complaint is not maintainable, and accordingly,
it is dismissed.
Sd/Sri. K. Srinivas Rao, Hon’ble Member
TS RERA
Sd/Sri. Laxmi NaryanaJannu, Hon’ble Member
TS RERA
Sd/Dr.N.Satyanarayana IAS(Retd), Hon’ble Chairperson
TS RERA
3of 5