Order Complaint No. 519 Of 2023

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.519 OF 2023
12th Day of March, 2024
Corum:

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

Sri Umesh Choudhary

…Complainant

Versus

M/s Alpine Infratech
Represented by its Managing Director

…Respondent

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing on
17.10.2023, 28.12.2023, 09.01.2024, 18.01.2024 and 30.01.2024 before this
Authority in the presence of the Complainant in person and Authorized
Representative of the Respondent Builder and upon hearing the arguments of both
parties, this Authority passes 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”) requesting
appropriate action against the Respondent Builder.

1

A. Brief facts on behalf of the Complainant:
3.

The Complainant submitted that he booked a flat (A-112) in August 2021 of

1120 sft in GMR Springfield Project, Survey No. 82 & 86 situated in Turkapally
Village under GHMC, Alwal Circle, Medchal- Malkajgiri district and paid 20% i.e.,
Rs.9,13,500 (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirteen Thousand and Five Hundred Only) of the
cost as per the demand of the Respondent Builder. Balance 80% amount was to be
arranged in form of loan.
4.

He submitted that being a Central Government Official, employees have the

facility of getting a loan in the form of House Building Allowance (HBA) from the
concerned department where the employee is working. The rate of interest is quite
low in comparison to any nationalized bank and the interest amount is also very
low as the office recovers first the principal portion in the form of EMI and then the
interest amount. Thus, the employee can save a big amount on the loan amount.
5.

He submitted that since the day of booking of the flat, he has informed and

requested the management of the Respondent Builder to hand over the documents
required to be submitted in my office for availing HBA. Several mails and calls have
been made in this regard wherein I have explicitly mentioned that the process of
getting loan from office is a time taking process as the office has to call for budget
from headquarter office (New Delhi) which will take its own course of time (3 to 4
months).
6.

That subsequently, in December 2022, after continuous perusal, a meeting

was held with the Managing Director (MD) namely Sri Md Amir Hussian and others
wherein he promised to give the documents at the earliest. However, the documents
in complete shape were handed on 20.02.2023 and the management has directed
the Complainant to pay the due amount by 28.03.2023 i.e within one month and

2

eight days only or else base price will be increased by Rs.200 per sft. Soon after
receiving the documents, the Complainant applied for a loan (HBA) in his office.
7.

That the management of the Respondent Builder started pressurizing in

March 2023 for payment. However, the Respondent Builder had not handed over
the documents in time and after giving the said documents on 20.02.2023, the
management has given only one month and eight days for payment which is
unethical, unreasonable, and unjustifiable.
8.

That thereafter, a meeting was held with the MD wherein, the Complainant

proposed to make the payment by July 2023 and an interim payment of
Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) in first week of May 2023. The MD
instructed to send mail in this regard so that he can put the matter on the Board,
however, they did not receive any mail or call in this regard.
9.

That as per the Complainant’s proposal of doing payment of Rs.5,00,000/-

(Rupees Five Lakhs Only) in first week of May 2023, the Complainant had taken
personal loan from AG Office Co-operative Society to make payment and arranged
hand loan from friends and relatives for the entire amount due.
10.

He submitted that in May 2023, the Complainant went to the Respondent

Builder and requested the MD to accept the due amount of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees
Twenty-Five Lakhs Only) instead of waiting for July. But the MD refused to accept
the amount and stated that he will only accept if the Complainant agreed to make
the payment with the revised base rate by Rs. 1000 per sft (i.e. Rs.1000*1120 =
Rs.11,20,000). According to the MD, as the Complainant has delayed in making
payment, he sought to increase the base price by Rs.1000 per sft or else he will
cancel my allotment of flat.

3

11.

The Complainant added that the delay in making payment occurred due to

non-handing of documents in time. Hence, management is responsible for such
delays. However, the MD is not ready to accept his fault and wants to revise the
rate or else wants to cancel the allotment of flat. The revised increased rate is not
acceptable as the delay in making payment did not occur on default of the
Complainant.
12.

He submitted that the budget sanctioned towards HBA cannot be kept

idle/unused for longer period of time. The Complainant had requested his office to
hold it for seven more days. Hence, the matter needs to be resolved in a few coming
days otherwise the sanctioned budget will be surrendered by the office to
headquarters office as they cannot kept the huge amount of budget for longer
period of time. This aspect, the Complainant has also intimated to the management
of the firm via mail and messages, but still there is no response. Accordingly, he
submitted that the Respondent Builder is harassing him and demanding abnormal
amount which is totally unethical and unjustifiable in nature and prayed to take
needful action against the Respondent Builder as per the applicable rules and
regulations and to get the flat at the original agreed rate.
B. Reply on behalf of the Respondent:
13.

Vide Reply dated 18.01.2024, the Respondent Builder submitted that

Complainant had approached the Respondent Company on 01.08.2021 and
expressed his desire to purchase a flat in the project "GMR Spring Flied".
Complainant was duly attended by the representative of the Respondent Company
and he was provided with the brochure as well as the specifications of various flats
which the Respondent Company were going to construct in the Project and also
since the Complainant opting pay the premium booking amount, discount on
booking over base price.
4

14.

That the Complainant herein after being satisfied with the quality of

construction and the amenities being provided by the Respondent Company in the
Project, choose to book a Flat No. A-112, the area of which was about 1120 Sq. Ft.
which was subject to final measurement after completion of construction, by
paying

amount

of

Rs.4,00,000/-

as

Provisional

Reservation

Money.

The

Complainant also signed the Application Form/Terms and Conditions of Allotment
('Terms and Conditions') after duly perusing and understanding the same.
15.

That the Complainant thereafter issued a cheque bearing No. "223981"

dated 10.08.2021 drawn on State Bank of India, Nampally Branch for an amount
of Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Only) and requested to present the same
upon his instructions. Thereafter, time and again he requested the Respondent
Company not to present the same but as a matter of fact the Respondent Company
was duped in the first instance by the Complainant in spite of availing discount
and not paying the agreed amount.
16.

That subsequently the Complainant, after several requests and remainders

from the Respondent Company paid an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One
Lakh Only) on 14.10.2021, an amount of Rs. 3,70,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs
Seventy Thousand Only) on 10.11.2021 by way of online transfer (NEFT) and an
amount of Rs. 43,500/- (Rupees Forty-Three Thousand and Five Hundred Only) on
31.12.2021 by way of Online Transfer (NEFT). In all, the Complainant paid an
amount of Rs.9,13,500/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirteen Thousand and Five
Hundred Only) only instead of agreed amounts of Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve
Lakhs Only). Even till date the said cheque is in the possession of the Respondent
Company unpresented.

5

17.

The Respondent submitted that as per the terms of allotment the

Complainant was required to pay the amounts as per the schedule linked to the
various stages of construction and after payment of substantial amount, the
Complainant was required to enter into Agreement of Sale with the Respondent
Company. The Complainant after several remainders and request finally entered
into Agreement of Sale in the month of January 2022.
18.

That the Respondent Company made several requests to the Complainant to

make payments as per the payment schedule plan, but the Complainant failed to
do so for the reasons best known to him. At the time booking was offered with loan
facility by the Respondent Company in various nationalized banks but the
Complainant initially agreed orally but later in the month of July 2022, started
requesting various documents from the Respondent Company. The Respondent
Company provided all the documents available them and requested to pay the
amounts at the earliest, but the Complainant failed to pay the amounts as per the
booking schedule.
19.

The Respondent submitted that, as the Complainant failed to perform his

part of contractual obligation and did not make the payment as per schedule, the
Company is justified in cancelling the booking dated 01.08.2021. The Respondent
added that as a matter of fact the Respondent Company sent several mails
requesting the Complainant to visit the office of the Respondent Company to sort
the issue. The Respondent Company even procured attested legal opinion from a
government designated advocate at its own cost which was beyond the preview of
the Respondent Company but despite this the Complainant demanded more
documents and started sending mails.

6

20.

The Respondent submitted that it requested the Complainant to visit the

Respondent company, but he said that he has Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs
Only) only which he is willing to pay the same and that he has been allotted with
HBA loan of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Only) same would be
disbursed to his account but never gave any proof of the same. That the
Complainant never gave any proof of allotment of any loan nor did he perform his
part of contractual obligation by paying the agreed amounts. To avoid the
payments of agreed amounts as per Conditions of Allotment and also as per the
agreement of sale, the Complainant made one or the other request for the
documents and that too after a lapse of one year and also which were beyond the
purview of the Respondent Company and evaded the payments due to the
Respondent Company. In light of the same, the Respondent Company prayed to
dismiss the Complaint.
C. Rejoinder on behalf of the Complainant
21.

Vide Rejoinder dated 19.01.2024, the Complainant submitted that after a

long discussion and negotiation, the agreed rate of ₹3482 per sft was arrived at,
hence no such special discount was offered. That at the time of booking the flat,
the Respondent promised to give some relaxation in amount pertaining towards
amenities and other secondary charges. However, after making the initial payment
by the Complainant they denied such promise. Also, as per payment schedule of
the agreement of sale, only 20% payment should have been done by the
Complainant which arrives to ₹9,13,500. Hence, the Complainant has made the
required payment of ₹9,13,500 and not the 30% i.e. ₹12.00 lakh.
22.

Since the day of booking of the flat, the Complainant has expressed his

intention of getting the HBA instead of taking bank loan. Further, that required
documents were only handed over to the Complainant in the last of week of
7

February 2023 after a long and continuous pursuance of the Complainant. It can
be well substantiated by the mails of Respondent dated 14.11.2022 wherein the
company stated that they can't provide the documents, mail dated 16.11.2022, the
Respondent Company stated what documents they can provide and what not, mail
dated 28.02.2023, the Respondent company stated that the documents were
handed over to the Complainant on 20.02.2023 and the complainant should make
the payment in one month. This all clearly signifies that the Respondent has not
given the required documents before February 2023.
23.

The Complainant further submitted that as per the promise made by the

Complainant, the Complainant has taken loan of Rs.24,50,000 (Rupees TwentyFour Lakhs and Fifty Thousand Only) from AG Office's Co- operative Society in the
month of May for making payment and went to the office of the Respondent for
making the payment of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Only). The
Complainant annexed the relevant documents in support of his contentions.
24.

That, meanwhile, the Respondent has raised two demands for making

payment, against which the Complainant has always reverted and requested to
provide the documents. It was specifically mentioned in all the mails of the
Complainant that delay in making payment was due to non-furnishing of
documents by the Respondent. Also, it was stated by the Respondent that based on
the legal documents of the projects several customers have obtained bank loan. In
this regard, it is to state that the required documents for HBA may have different
checklist to be adhered to as it is a government loan which have its own
requirement.
25.

He submitted that as per prevailing rules and regulations, the sanctioned

HBA should be utilized within a month from the date of the sanctioned or else it
should be returned to the Government account along with interest. Complainant
8

has requested its Group officer managed to hold it upto first week of December
2023. Several mails were also sent to the Respondent in order to settle the issue
immediately otherwise the Complainant has to surrender the sanctioned amount.
However, the Respondent was least bothered to reply and not taken cognizance of
it. In light of the same, he prayed that the Respondent be directed to accept the
payment at agreed base rate of ₹3482 per sft and to allow minimum six months'
time period for making the payment of ₹25.00 lakh to the Respondent as obtaining
fresh HBA from the office will take minimum six months.
D. Observations and Directions of the Authority
26.

The Complainant and the Respondent, have, as per their submission before

this Authority, executed an Agreement of Sale in the year 2022. Both have filed a
copy of an undated, insufficiently stamped and un-registered Agreement of Sale in
which, both have agreed as under:
i.

In Clause 1.3, the Complainant agreed to make payment as per payment
plan set out in Schedule C (Payment Plan).

ii.

As per the Payment Schedule annexed to the said Agreement of Sale, which
is not marked as Schedule C, the Complainant categorically agreed to
payment of the schedule therein.

iii.

Further, in the annexure to the said Payment Schedule, Point No.4
stipulates that prices are subject to change without prior notice upon nonconfirmation of sale.

27.

The said Agreement is taken on record as both parties agreed to have

executed the same. It is also observed that vide e-mail dated 15.04.2022, the
Complainant sought for several documents from the Respondent Builder to avail
HBA loan being a Central Government Employee. The documents as sought for
include the following:
9

i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
x.
xi.
xii.
xiii.
xiv.
xv.
xvi.
xvii.
xviii.
xix.

28.

Allotment letter from the selling agency
Agreement of sale
Valuation report from the registered valuers
Estimates
Draft sale deed
Flat plan
Block plan
Sworn declarations
Government pleader’s certificate
Permission under Conduct Rules for purchase of a flat
Non-drawal certificate from spouse, if he/she is a central government
employee.
Copy of the registration of the firm,
Copy of the sale deed of the site,
Copy of the Certificate of Encumbrance on property (15 years)
Construction permit
Approved plan of proposed building
permission under Conduct Rules for purchase of site
permission under Conduct Rules for construction of the house
Notice under Section 26(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act,
1976, amongst others.

Complainant issued reminder e-mails on 11.06.2022 and 20.10.2022 to

submit the documents in order to avail the HBA loan amount. He submitted that
on account of delay in submission of some of the above-quoted documents,
opinions and certificates by the Respondent, the Complainant could not procure
the HBA loan and thereby failed to make the payment. He added that therefore,
delay cannot be attributed to the Complainant.
29.

Per contra, the Respondent Builder submitted copy of the e-mail dated

27.02.2023 wherein, it was agreed by the Respondent Builder that all necessary
documents, opinions and certificates were submitted to the Complainant vide email dated 20.02.2023 and further directed the Complainant to complete the
payment by 20.03.2023 as otherwise, base price will be increased by Rs.200 per
sft. Further, the Respondent also previously issued an e-mail dated 12.11.2022 to
the Complainant stating that they are in receipt of Rs.9,13,500/- (Rupees Nine
Lakhs Thirteen Thousand and Five Hundred Only) and further that a balance
10

payment of Rs.11,41,875/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Forty-One Thousand Eight
Hundred and Seventy-Five Only) is pending as per construction stage to be paid by
20.11.2022. The Respondent mentioned, in the said e-mail dated 12.11.2022, that
in case the Complainant fails to pay such an amount immediately, the construction
of the respective flat may be stopped.
30.

In this regard, it is pertinent to note that the Complainant agreed to a

payment schedule as per the undated Agreement of Sale which is not disputed by
either party. In such circumstances, the Complainant is bound by the same and
failure of the Complainant in complying with the payment schedule is derogation of
his duty under Section 19(6) of the Act. It is also observed, documents such as
ownership

documents,

link

documents,

encumbrance

certificate,

copy

of

permission proceedings, sanction plan are very much available in the GHMC/TSbPASS portal as well as on the TS RERA website. The legal opinion on ownership
documents would normally be provided by an advocate appointed by the bank
upon payment of fee. Similarly, technical opinion on sanction plan & permission
will be obtained by chartered engineer appointed by the bank upon payment of fee.
Therefore, the delay in procuring the documents cannot be attributed to the
Respondent Builder as the said documents may not readily available with him and
he may not be in a position to produce documents such as government pleader's
certificate, estimates, permission under Conduct Rules for purchase of site and for
construction of the house, Notice under Section 26(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling &
Regulation) Act, 1976, etc.
31.

Clause 9.3 of the undated Agreement of Sale executed between the parties

clearly stipulates as under:
“(i) In case the Allottee fails to make payments for 2 (two) consecutive
demands made by the Promoter as per the Payment Plan annexed hereto,
11

despite having been issued notice in that regard the allottee shall be liable to
pay interest to the promoter on the unpaid amount at the rate prescribed in the
Rules;
(ii) In case of Default by Allottee under the condition listed above continues for
a period beyond 2 (two) consecutive months after notice from the Promoter in
this regard, the Promoter may cancel the allotment of the [Apartment/Plot] in
favour of the Allottee and refund the money paid to him by the allottee by
deducting the booking amount and the interest liabilities and this Agreement
shall thereupon stand terminated. Provided that the promoter shall intimate
the allottee about such termination at least thirty days prior to such
termination. The amount shall be repaid by the Promoter within a period of
ninety days after termination or the date on which the Promoter is able to
resell the Apartment/Plot to another purchaser, whichever is later.
32.

Further, a perusal of the e-mail dated 16.12.2022, clearly stipulates that the

Respondent Builder made several attempts to communicate with the Complainant
in order to complete the payment with respect to the flat, however he failed to do so
on account of delay in procuring HBA loan amount. Subsequently, the Respondent
did not accept the payment offered by the Complainant stating that base price has
increased on account of failure of the Complainant to make payment as per agreed
schedule.
33.

In this regard it is observed that, the Complainant has an obligation to

adhere to the payment schedule as agreed in its Agreement of Sale as per Section
19(6) and once it is agreed amongst the parties as regards a certain timeline with
respect to payment for the flat, both parties are bound by the same. It was
incumbent upon the Complainant to make the payment in time as per agreed
terms, moreso, as the Project is at 75% completion as per submission of the
12

Respondent, and mere not procurement of the loan amount cannot put the
Respondent Builder under financial distress.
34.

Given that the Respondent Builder has duly furnished all requisite

documentation for the Complainant's acquisition of an HBA loan in 20.02.2023,
and the Complainant has acknowledged receipt thereof, upon consideration of the
facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice while exercising its powers
under Section 37, this Authority directs the following:
a. The Complainant and the Respondent agreed to comply with the terms of the
Agreement of Sale filed by both. In the said Agreement, explanation (iii) to
Clause 1.2 stipulates that the vendors shall periodically intimate in writing to
the purchaser, the amount payable as stated above and the purchaser shall
make the payment demanded by the vendors within the time and in the
manner specified above. That admittedly, on 20.02.2023, the Respondent
supplied all documents, opinions and certificates in relation to procuring the
HBA loan to the Complainant and on the said date the Respondent also
sought for remaining amounts/balance payment from the Complainant as
per the payment schedule. Therefore, in light of the said circumstances, the
Complainant is directed to pay the remaining amounts which is pending as
on date as per the payment schedule agreed upon by both the parties within
60 (sixty) days, along with interest of 10.65% as per Rule 15 of the Rules,
2017 read with with Section 19(7) from the date on which the documents
were received by the Complainant for procuring HBA loan i.e., 20.02.2023.
b. Further, in the event the Complainant fails to complete such payment, the
Respondent is to initiate measures in accordance with the provisions of the
Act and Rules thereunder.

13

35.

In lieu thereof, the present complaint stands disposed of.

36.

If aggrieved by this Order, the parties may approach the TS Real Estate

Appellate Tribunal (vide G.O.Ms.No.8, Dt.11-01-2018, the Telangana State Value
Added Tax Appellate Tribunal has been designated as TS Real Estate Appellate
Tribunal to manage the affairs under the Act till the regular Tribunal is established)
as per Section 44 of the Act, 2016.

Sd/Sri K. Srinivasa Rao,
Hon'ble Member,
TS RERA

Sd/Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu,
Hon'ble Member,
TS RERA

Sd/Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.),
Hon'ble Chairperson,
TS RERA

14