Order Complaint No. 44 of 2024

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.44 OF 2024
23rd September, 2024
Corum:

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

Sri V Mahesh Kumar

…Complainant

Versus
M/s MNR Infra
…Respondent
The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for final
hearing on 13.08.2024 before this Authority in the presence of the
Complainant appeared in person, while the Respondent, despite due notice,
failed to appear for any of the hearings. Upon hearing the submissions
advanced by the Complainant and considering the material available on
record, this Authority proceeds to pass the following ORDER:
2.

The present 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
Respondent.
A. Brief Facts on behalf of the complainant:

3.

The Complainant purchased a flat measuring 2,190 square feet near

Wonderla under a pre-launch offer from the Respondent at the rate of Rs.
2,200 per square foot. The Complainant paid an advance of Rs. 2, 00,000/through NEFT to the Respondent. It was mutually decided between the
parties that the remaining balance of the consideration amount would be
paid after the Respondent obtained the Layout Permission (LP) Number,
which was expected to be received within 6 to 8 months. Despite repeated
1 of 3

assurances, the Respondent failed to secure the requisite permissions to
proceed with the project within the stipulated time frame. The Complainant,
upon noticing a lack of progress in the project, continuously inquired about
the status. In response to the Complainant's persistent demands for clarity,
the Respondent unilaterally cancelled the flat registration and assured the
Complainant that the advance amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- would be refunded
shortly. However, despite these assurances, the Respondent has failed to
refund the amount to date. Aggrieved by the Respondent's actions, the
Complainant approached this Authority, seeking relief by way of a direction
to the Respondent to refund the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-.
B. Proceedings before the Authority:
4.

After the registration of the complaint, notices were issued to the

Respondent and in addition, the Complainant affixed a copy of the notice on
the front door of the Respondent's premises as part of the service. However,
the Respondent remained absent during hearings held on 12.06.2024,
11.07.2024 and 13.08.2024. As a result, the Respondent was placed ex
parte.
5.

The present matter was listed for hearing on 12.06.2024. During the

said hearing, the Complainant reiterated the submissions made in the
complaint and urged the Authority to direct the Respondent to return the
advance amount. The Authority, after hearing the Complainant, directed
him to submit documentary evidence substantiating his claim, including
proof of the payment of Rs. 2,00,000/- towards the said project of the
Respondent. The Complainant was specifically asked to furnish relevant
documents such as a payment receipt, booking letter, or sale agreement to
establish his status as an allottee and the purpose of the said payment. On
the subsequent date of hearing, the Complainant failed to provide any such
documents or evidence to support his claim.
C. Observations of the Authority:
6.

After examining the material on record, it is evident that the

Complainant has not produced any documentary evidence to substantiate

2 of 3

the payment of Rs. 2, 00,000/- as an advance towards the purchase of a flat
in the Respondent’s project.
7.

The Authority had granted ample opportunity to the Complainant to

produce supporting documents, such as the booking letter/ sale agreement,
or payment receipt, which would establish that the amount paid was indeed
for the purpose of purchasing the said flat.
8.

In the absence of such evidence, the Authority is constrained to

observe that the Complainant has failed to prove his claim that he was an
allottee in the project or that the payment made to the Respondent was for
the purchase of the flat.
9.

In light of the above facts and circumstances, the Authority is of the

opinion that the Complainant has failed to substantiate his claim through
documentary evidence.
10.

Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed for lack of proof.

11.

However, the dismissal of this complaint does not preclude the

Complainant from approaching the Authority or any other forum with
appropriate evidence in the future, should such evidence become available.
12.

In the event any party is aggrieved by this Order, they may file an

appeal before the Telangana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, as per Section
44 of the RE(R&D) Act, within 60 days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Sd/Sri. K. Srinivas Rao,
Hon’ble Member
TG RERA

Sd/Sri. Laxmi NaryanaJannu,
Hon’ble Member
TG RERA

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

3 of 3