TG-RERA Authority

Order Complaint No. 77 of 2025

03 Nov 2025
TG-RERA Authority
7 Pages

Order Details

Order Type TG-RERA Authority
Complaint/Case Number Complaint No. 77 of 2025
Year 2025
Order Category Regular Order
Order Date 03 Nov 2025
Complainant Bandlaguda, Nagole, Tatti Annaram, K.V Rangareddy, Telangana 500068)
Respondent Beside Bahar cafe, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500074)
PDF Document Download PDF BU_131125160353703.pdf

Full Order Text

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
CC. No. 77 of 2025
Dated:
Quorum:

03rd November 2025

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

Between:
Sriramoju Rajeev
(H.no. 12-1468/1 Flat no: 409, Prakritit Nivas, Fathullaguda,
Bandlaguda, Nagole, Tatti Annaram, K.V Rangareddy, Telangana 500068)

…Complainant
AND
1.

M/s. Krithika Infra Developers
(Rep. by its Managing Partner, D. Srikanth,
3rd & 4th Floor, Sri Padanjali Building,
Beside Bahar cafe, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500074)

2.

Doomavath Gopal
(Director of M/s Krithika Infra Developers
3rd & 4th Floor, Sri Padanjali Building,
Beside Bahar cafe, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500074)

3.

Doomavath Srikanth
(MD of M/s Krithika Infra Developers
3rd & 4th Floor, Sri Padanjali Building,
Beside Bahar cafe, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500074)

4.

Smt. Radha Bhukya
(MD of M/s Krithika Infra Developers
3rd & 4th Floor, Sri Padanjali Building,
Beside Bahar cafe, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500074)

5.

Shri. Doomavath Shashikanth
(Executive Director of M/s Krithika Infra Developers
3rd & 4th Floor, Sri Padanjali Building,
Beside Bahar cafe, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500074)

…Respondents

The present matter filed by the Complainant herein came up for hearing before this
Authority in the presence of the Complainant, and none appeared on behalf of the Respondents
despite service of notice; hence set ex parte and upon hearing the submissions of the Complainant,
this Authority proceeds to pass the following ORDER:
Page 1 of 6


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.

The Complainant submitted that she has entered into an Agreement of Sale with the

developer with the intent to buy a proposed residential flat no. A-508, Block-A, 5th floor, builtup area 1594 sq. ft. feet’s designated to be constructed in the complex known as Seshadri’s Sliver
Oak and the Complainant submitted that has paid full and final consideration of Rs, 33,47,400/for the said property and receipts were attached and the Respondent/Developer promised to deliver
the property to the Complainant within 2 years from the date of entering into the agreement on
05.02.2022. However, no construction work has commenced to date.
4.

After pursuing the matter continuously with the developer, the developer has promised to

register 35.4 Sq. Yards of UDS land to the Complainant as a guarantee tot the consideration paid,
but however the developer failed to register the said land on favour Complainant and the
Respondent/developer failed to commence any construction work in the said project till date
B. Relief(s) Sought
5.

Accordingly, the Complainant sought for the following reliefs:
1. Direct the Respondent to refund of Rs. 33,47,400/- along with interest from the date of full
payment as per the govt norms, or;
2. Direct the Respondent to register the land to the Complainant, and to get RERA
Registration and to commence the development at the earliest.

C. Interim Relief
6.

Accordingly, the Complainant sought for the following interim reliefs:
Direct the Respondent to refund of Rs. 33,47,400/- along with interest from the date of full
payment as per the govt norms

Page 2 of 6


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

questions arises for adjudication:
I.

Whether the Respondents have violated any provisions of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016?

II.

Whether Complainant is liable for relief as prayed for? If yes, to what extent?

E. Observation of the Authority:

8.

Before further adjudicating on the matter, this Authority takes due note of the repeated non-

compliance by the Respondents, who have failed to appear before this Authority despite service
of notice and affording sufficient opportunities. In view of their continued absence, the
Respondents are hereby set ex parte, and the matter is being adjudicated based on the pleadings,
documents, and submissions placed on record by the Complainant.
Point I
9.

It is pertinent to mention that this Authority has already dealt with similar violations by

the same Respondent in Complaint No. 115 of 2024, which related to this very project. After a
detailed examination of that matter, this Authority passed an order, holding that they had violated
provisions of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016. In that said order, it was found that the Respondent had
marketed and sold units without registering the project with this authority, in contravention of
Sections 3 and 4 of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016. Further, the Respondent had also received advance
payments exceeding 10% of the consideration prior to execution of a registered agreement for
sale, thereby violating under Section 13(1) of RE(R&D) Act, 2016. Consequently, a penalty of
₹9,96,050/- was levied on the Respondent under Sections 59, 60, and 61 of the RE(R&D) Act,
2016, and the Respondent was directed to register the project without further delay and to restrain
from engaging in any marketing or sale activity until compliance was ensured.
10.

As this Authority had already adjudicated the matter on similar facts and imposed a penalty

for violation of Section 3. Therefore, the issue of unregistered development by the Respondentpromoter in the present case stands on an identical footing, and has already been addressed through
the said earlier order
11.

Further, this Authority, in its Order in Complaint No. 86 of 2025 dated 16.10.2025,

declared the Respondent No. 1/Promoter, M/s Krithika Infra Developers, as a “defaulter”
Page 3 of 6


Hence, Point I is answered in the affirmative

Point II

13.

Upon perusal of the Agreement of Sale dated 05.02.2022, executed between Shri. D.

Srikanth, Managing Partner of M/s Krithika Infra Developers, in favour of the Complainant, it is
evident that the Complainant has paid an amount of Rs. 33,47,400/- (Rupees Thirty-Three Lakh
Forty-Seven Thousand Four Hundred Rupees Only) towards the said flat, which has been duly
acknowledged by the Respondents.

14.

It is further observed from the documents placed on record that Respondent No.1 has

obtained building permission bearing No. 009613/BP/HMDA/2100/GHT/2023 for the
construction of 2 Cellars + 1 Stilt + 1 Upper Floor. However, despite having secured such
permission, Respondent No.1 has neither commenced any construction activity at the project site
nor demonstrated any bona fide intention to fulfil its contractual obligations. This persistent
inaction, notwithstanding the substantial amounts collected from the Complainant, reflects a
deliberate and dishonest course of conduct on the part of the Respondents.

15.

Accordingly, the relief sought by the Complainants, insofar as it pertains to the refund of

the amounts paid along with applicable interest, deserves to be allowed.

16.

In these circumstances, Section 18(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development)

Act, 2016, confers a clear statutory right upon an allottee to seek refund of the amounts paid, along
with interest, in cases where the promoter fails to complete or is unable to deliver possession
within the stipulated period Hence, the Complainants are entitled to refund of the amount paid
along with interest, as mandated under the said provision.

Page 4 of 6


In light of the abovementioned observations, this Authority notes that the Complainant is

entitled for relief as mentioned in the main complaint under Section 18(1)(a) of the Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which reads as follows:

(1) If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot or
building,
a) in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale or, as the case may be, duly
completed by the date specified therein; or
b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or
revocation of the registration under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be liable on
demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without
prejudice to any other remedy available, to return the amount received by him in respect
of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be
prescribed in this behalf including compensation in the manner as provided under this Act.

18.

Accordingly, the Complainant entitled for refund of the amount of Rs. 33,47,400/-

(Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Forty Seven thousand Four Hundred Rupees Only) paid by the
Complainant to the Respondents and also with the interest at the rate prescribed under Rule 15 of
the Telangana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, i.e., the State Bank of
India’s Marginal Cost of Lending Rate (MCLR) plus 2% per annum (i.e., 8.75% + 2%), calculated
from the respective date of Agreement of Sale until the date of actual refund.

19.

In view of the above findings, this Authority is of the considered opinion that the

Complainant is entitled to the relief sought, refund of the entire sale consideration with interest.

20.

Hence, Point II is answered in the affirmative, and the Complainant is entitled to a refund

along with applicable interest.

F. Directions of the Authority:

21.

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:

Page 5 of 6


22.

In light of the above, the present Complaint is disposed of in terms of the directions

contained herein. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sri K. Srinivasa Rao,

Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu,

Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.),

Hon'ble Member,

Hon'ble Member,

Hon'ble Chairperson,

TG RERA

TG RERA

TG RERA

Page 6 of 6


Related Orders

Interim Order Complaint No.228 of 2025
Rangareddy, Telangana, 500077)
15 Apr 2026
Order Complaint No. 386 of 2025
Koti, Hyderabad-500027.
09 Apr 2026
Order Complaint No. 153 of 2024
Telangana – 500011.
08 Apr 2026
Order Complaint No. 152 of 2024
Telangana – 500011.
08 Apr 2026
Order Complaint No. 151 of 2024
Telangana – 500011.
08 Apr 2026

Need Complete Property Verification?

Get ownership details, EC records, survey sketch, zone checks, geo-insights & AI analysis - all in one place

Ownership Details
EC Records
Survey Sketch
Zone Checks
Geo-Insights
AI Analysis
Try VerifyMyLand Now ✨ Get comprehensive property verification in minutes

Verify Your Property Before You Buy

AI-powered legal due diligence — title verification, encumbrance checks, zoning compliance, and risk assessment in minutes. Catch issues before they cost you crores.