Order Complaint No. 643 Of 2022

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.643 OF 2022
07th Day of February, 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. Mirza Ayaz Baig

…Complainant
Versus

M/s Swarga Agro
Represented by its Proprietor,
Smt. Swarna Devi Kosaraju

…Respondent

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing on
26.09.2023 and 09.01.2024, before this Authority in the presence of the
Complainant in person and none for the Respondent, and upon hearing the
arguments, 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 read with Rule (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.

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

The Complainant submitted that the Complainant is the owner, in respect of

the Property bearing Plot No. 84, admeasuring 412 Square Yards and Plot No.

1 of 5

86/8, admeasuring 435 Square Yards, totally admeasuring 847 Square Yards,
equivalent to 708 Square Meters forming part of Survey Nos. 43, 45, 46 and 47
situated at Mokila Village & Gram Panchayat, Shankarpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy
District, (Hereinafter be referred as "Said Property"). The Said Property, is owned by
the complainant herein by virtue of Regd. Sale Deed Dated 08.01.2013 bearing its
Document No. 110 of 2013, Registered at the Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Shankarpally, Ranga Reddy District. The 'Said Property, was entrusted for
development to the Respondent herein by virtue of Registered Development
Agreement Cum General Power of Attorney, dated 02.09.2020, registered at the
office of Sub-Registrar, Shankarpally, bearing its Document No. 4950 of 2020.

4.

That upon the execution and registration of the Development Agreement, the

Respondent shall proceed to meet the objects of the Development Agreement. Upon
waiting for Seven (07) Months, the Respondent approached this Hon'ble Authority
for Registration of the Project and this Hon'ble Forum issued Registration
Certificate of Project, dated 30.04.2021 under project registration number
P02400002829, for Project "My Nest Swarna Kuteer”.

5.

That subsequently, the Respondent has failed to initiate any sort of

Development work at the Said Property, and that the Complainant already initiated
legal process seeking to terminate the contract as null and void. Therefore, he
prayed to cancel the Registration Certificate vide No. P02400002829, dated
30.04.2021, for Project "My Nest Swarna Kuteer", Survey No. 43, 45, 46 and 47,
Plot No. of Site: 84, 86 / B at Mokila, Shankarpalle, Ranga Reddy-501203.
B. Reply on behalf of the Respondent:
6.

The Respondent, vide Reply dated 05.12.2022, submitted that based upon

mutual understanding and common interests the Complainant had entered into a
2 of 5

registered Development Agreement cum GPA dated 02.09.2020 bearing Document
No. 4950 of 2020, however it is false to say that the Respondent has not been
acting in accordance with the obligations of the Respondent as specified in the
Development Agreement. That the readiness and willingness of the Respondent in
performing its obligations under the Development Agreement can be inferred from
its act of applying for the Building Permission in the Said Property before the
HMDA on 26.09.2020 itself i.e., within 24 days from the date of entering and
executing the development agreement. That the said period of 24 days was also
taken by the Respondent, only to execute the building and layout drawings in
accordance with the HMDA rules and regulations, which are a precondition for
getting of any approvals from the regulating authority i.e., HMDA.

7.

It was submitted that in lieu of the non-cooperation of the Complainant in so

far as it regards to the obligations of the Complainant which are pre-conditioned to
the ability of the Respondent to sell or execute any agreements with regards to the
Said Property, the Respondent neither marketed the project to invite any
prospective allottees or purchasers, nor entered into any agreement with respect to
the Project.

8.

It was submitted that any registration certificate granted by the Authority

under Section 5, can only be revoked or cancelled if any of the conditions as
specified in Section 7, are met and that the Complainant has failed to show any
cause or even plead any circumstance which warrants the interference of the
adjudicating authority, let alone warranting interference for the purposes of
cancelling the registration issued by the Authority.

3 of 5

9.

It was submitted that the certificate issued by the TSRERA be cancelled as

the promoter has not commenced construction despite obtaining the permission is
false. That the Respondent has already commenced construction, and the
Complainant despite having knowledge of the same has misrepresented and
concocted the present complaint for the purposes to unlawfully benefit from the
relief. However, assuming but not admitting that the construction has not
commenced, such ground in itself is not enough to warrant the exercise of the
revocation powers under Section 7 of the Act.

10.

It was submitted that the secondary plea of the Complainant that the

certificate issued by the TSRERA be cancelled, as the Development Agreement cum
GPA dated 02.09.2020 has become void and unenforceable is false. The
Respondent and Complainant had expressly agreed in Clause 9.2 of the Agreement
that the only remedy to any delay on part of the Developer to complete the
construction would be the complainant's right to claim compensation for an
amount of Rs. 6000 per month for the unit falling under the share of the
complainant for the delay period. The Complainant and the Respondent have
submitted to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator appointed in accordance with
provisions of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.

11.

It was submitted that the Complainant is neither an allottee who has

entered into an agreement of sale, nor is a prospective allottee, nor is a real estate
who is affected by the registered project, rather is the landowner who wishes to
terminate the development agreement without following the procedure established
by law. Complainant has failed to show any cause to warrant the interference of the
Authority, let alone warrant the cancellation of the registration certificate by the

4 of 5

Authority, and for such reasons alone the Complaint filed by the Complainant is
liable to be dismissed.

C. Observations and directions of the Authority
12.

Without going into the merits of the matter, it is observed that, registration

No.P02400002829 stands expired on 31.12.2023 and as per the submission of the
Complainant, the Respondent has still not started any construction activity. It is
observed that the relief sought by the Complainant to revoke the registration of the
Respondent Promoter bearing No.P02400002829 is now infructuous on account of
its expiry. Therefore, the present complaint is disposed of as infructuous.

13.

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)
within 60 days from the date of receipt of this Order.

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

5 of 5