Order Complaint No. 482 of 2025

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Complaint No. 482 of 2025
Dated: 9th March 2026
Quorum:

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

Saritha Dadi,
R/o. Flat No. 511, Block No. 3, R V Brindavanam Apts,

…Complainant

Miyapur, Hyderabad – 500049.

Versus
M/s Jayathri Infrastructure India Pvt Ltd,
Represented by its Managing Director Kakarla Srinivas,
O/o. Plot No. 140/141, Eminent Plaza, 6th Phase Road, KPHB Colony,
Kukatpally, Hyderabad – 500081.

…Respondent
The present matter filed by the Complainant mentioned herein above came up for
hearing before this Authority in the presence of the Complainant in person, and none for the
Respondent despite service of notice, hence set ex-parte and upon hearing the submissions of
the Complainant, this Authority proceeds to pass the following 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. Brief facts of the case:
3.

It is submitted that the Complainant entered into a Memorandum of Understanding

dated 06.12.2021 with Sri Kakarla Srinivas, Managing Director of M/s. Jayathri Infrastructure
India Pvt. Ltd., in respect of a pre-launch offer for allotment of 200 square feet of commercial
space proposed to be constructed on land owned by the Respondent bearing Survey No. 36/20,
situated at Gopanapally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, within the limits of GHMC, Ranga
Reddy District.
4.

As per the said Memorandum of Understanding, the scheduled date for delivery of the

said commercial space was December 2024. It is submitted that the Complainant paid a total
consideration of ₹11,76,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Seventy-Six Thousand only) towards the
1 of 6

---

It is submitted that, as per the Memorandum of Understanding, the Respondent was

required to pay ₹50/- per square foot per month to the Complainant till delivery of the
commercial space, i.e., up to December 2024. It is stated that the Respondent paid the said
amount up to July 2022, and that the amount is due from August 2022 onwards.
6.

It is submitted that on 27.10.2022, the Complainant submitted a letter seeking

cancellation of the Memorandum of Understanding and refund of the amount paid. It is stated
that on 14.04.2023, the Respondent agreed to refund the amount within a period of three to six
months.
7.

It is further submitted that the Respondent executed a sale deed in favour of the

Complainant in respect of 02 guntas of agricultural land situated in Survey No.
271/AA6/1/1/1/1/1/1, located at Ettaravaly Village, Shabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as
collateral security.
B. Relief(s) Sought:
8.

Accordingly, the Complainant sought the following relief:
i.

Direct the Respondent–Builder to refund the sum of ₹11,76,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs
Seventy-Six Thousand only) to the Complainant, along with interest at the rate of 20%
per annum, at the earliest, as the project has not yet been commenced.

C. Points to be determined:
9.

Based on the facts and circumstances placed before this Authority, the following

questions arise for adjudication:
I.

Whether the Respondent has violated section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Act, 2016?
II. Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief sought? If so, to what extent?
D. Observations of the Authority:
10.

The record clearly indicates that despite due service of notice through registered post

and substituted service, the Respondents have failed to appear before this Authority, nor have
they filed any written response or made any representation to contest the allegations made by
the Complainants. Such persistent non-appearance and failure to respond, despite repeated
opportunities afforded, demonstrate a deliberate disregard for the proceedings of this Authority.
Therefore, after being satisfied that due process was duly followed and all procedural
2 of 6

---

Upon careful consideration of the pleadings and documents placed on record, this

Authority observes that the present complaint pertains to a pre-launch offer made by the
Respondent in respect of proposed commercial space admeasuring 200 square feet, under a
Memorandum of Understanding dated 06.12.2021, in the Project “Western Galaxy” situated at
Survey No. 36/20, Gopanapally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
12.

This Authority notes that multiple complaints of a similar nature have been filed against

the same Respondent concerning the very same project. In prior proceedings, the Respondent’s
Counsel had submitted that due to non-compliance with the Agreement of Sale entered into
with Sri M. Laxmi Kanthai and Sri V. Gowrith on 25.03.2021, a portion of the project land is
under litigation before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, thereby preventing the commencement of
the project. Consequently, the said project has not been registered under RERA.
13.

This Authority further notes that in Complaint No. 1037 of 2023 & batch matters, this

Authority had directed an inspection of the concerned project site through the Engineering Staff
College of India (ESCI) vide Letter No. 1458/2023/TSRERA dated 10.10.2023. As per the
inspection report submitted by ESCI (ESCI/PD/TSRERA/07/2023- 24) dated 01.12.2023, the
project site remains vacant with no progress. There is no material placed on record to establish
the Respondent’s ownership or legal authority to undertake the project.
14.

This Authority has previously imposed a penalty of ₹36,70,000/- on the Respondent for

contravention of Section 3 of the RE (R&D) Act, 2016 in Complaint No. 1037 of 2023 & batch
matters, vide order dated 12.08.2024. Since the violation under Section 3 of the Act in respect
of the same project has already been examined and penalized, this Authority does not deem it
appropriate to impose an additional penalty under Section 3 of the RE(R&D) Act in the present
complaint.
Accordingly, Point No. I is answered in the above terms.
Point II
15.

This Authority observes that in the present complaint, the Complainant has sought

refund of the amount paid to the Respondent towards the allotment of commercial space
3 of 6

---

It is evident from the record that the Respondent has failed to fulfil its contractual

obligations. The Respondent neither commenced the project nor made any progress towards
construction. Section 18(1) of the RE(R&D) Act provides that if a promoter fails to complete
or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot or building in accordance with the terms
of the agreement, the allottee has an unqualified right to withdraw from the project and seek
refund of the amount paid along with interest.
17.

The provision for refund with interest applies when the promoter fails to complete the

project and the allottee wishes to withdraw. The allottee is entitled to interest to safeguard their
interests if the promoter fails to perform their obligations and is unable to hand over possession.
18.

Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil

Appeal Nos. 3581-3590 of 2022, Civil Appeal Diary No. 9796/2019, M/s Imperia Structures
Limited vs. Anil Patni & Others, wherein it was held:
" In terms of Section 18 of the RERA Act, if a promoter fails to complete or is
unable to give possession of an apartment duly completed by the date specified in
the agreement, the Promoter would be liable, on demand, to return the amount
received by him in respect of that apartment if the allottee wishes to withdraw from
the Project. Such right of an allottee is specifically made “without prejudice to
any other remedy available to him”. The right so given to the allottee is
unqualified and if availed, the money deposited by the allottee has to be refunded
with interest at such rate as may be prescribed. The proviso to Section 18(1)
contemplates a situation where the allottee does not intend to withdraw from the
Project. In that case he is entitled to and must be paid interest for every month of
delay till the handing over of the possession. It is upto the allottee to proceed
either under Section 18(1) or under proviso to Section 18(1).”
19.

Further, in M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Private Limited vs. State of Uttar

Pradesh & Others, the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated that Section 18(1) of the Act clearly
4 of 6

---

Similarly, in Civil Appeal Nos. 6745-6749 of 2021, M/s Newtech Promoters and

Developers Private Limited vs. State of UP & Others, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed:
“Section 18(1) of the Act spells out the consequences if the promoter fails to
complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot or building either
in terms of the agreement for sale or to complete the project by the date specified
therein or on account of discontinuance of his business as a developer either on
account of suspension or revocation of the registration under the Act or for any
other reason, the allottee/home buyer holds an unqualified right to seek refund of
the amount with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf.”
21.

Based on the materials available on record, the averments made by the Complainant,

and the history of the Respondent’s violations, it is evident that the Respondent has kept several
complainants on hold for years by making false assurances regarding the registration of
commercial spaces in their favour. It is pertinent to note that M/s Jayathri Infrastructures has
consistently violated the RE(R&D) Act by misleading the public in multiple projects, thereby
demonstrating mala fide intent.
22.

Therefore, considering the aforementioned decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and

the provision of Section 18 of the RE (R&D) Act, this Authority is of the considered view that
the Complainant, having invested a substantial amount in anticipation of acquiring the allotted
commercial space, has been wrongfully deprived of the same due to the Respondent’s failure.
Accordingly, the Complainant is entitled to the relief sought, which includes a full refund of
the amount paid along with applicable interest.
23.

With respect to the rate of interest, the Authority notes that while the Complainant has

claimed interest at 20% per annum, the rate of interest payable under the RE(R&D) Act is
governed by Rule 15 of the Telangana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017,
which links it to the State Bank of India’s Marginal Cost of Lending Rate (MCLR) plus 2%.
The claim for a higher rate of 20% therefore cannot be accepted. The Complainants shall
instead be entitled to interest at the rate prescribed under the RE(R&D) Act and Rules
thereunder, calculated from the date of the Memorandum of Understanding entered into with
the Complainant, i.e., 06.12.2021 until the date of actual realization.

5 of 6

---

In view of the above, this Authority holds that the Complainant is entitled to the relief

sought to the extent indicated herein. The Respondent is directed to refund the entire amount
of ₹11,76,000/- paid by the Complainant, along with interest at the rate of State Bank of India’s
Marginal Cost of Lending Rate (MCLR) plus 2%, calculated from the date of the Memorandum
of Understanding, i.e., 06.12.2021 till the date of actual realization.
25.

The Complainant shall return and reconvey the collateral land, to the Respondent

immediately upon receipt of the refunded amount, inclusive of interest.
Accordingly, Point No. II is answered in the above terms.
E. Directions of the Authority:
26.

In exercise of the powers conferred upon this Authority under Sections 37 and 38 of the

Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and in furtherance of the findings and
conclusions drawn hereinabove, the following directions are hereby issued:
i.

The Respondent is directed to refund the entire amount of ₹11,76,000/- (Rupees Eleven
Lakhs Seventy-Six Thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 10.75% per annum
(SBI MCLR of 8.75% + 2%) calculated from the date of the Memorandum of
Understanding entered into with the Complainant, i.e., 06.12.2021 until the date of
actual realization. The said refund together with interest shall be made within thirty (30)
days from the date of this order.

ii.

The complainant shall return and reconvey the collateral land to the Respondent
immediately upon receipt of the refunded amount, inclusive of interest.

27.

Failing to comply with the above-said direction by Respondent shall attract penalty in

accordance with Section 63 of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016.
28.

The complaint stands disposed of in the above terms. There shall be 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

6 of 6

---