Order Complaint No. 827 Of 2023

BEFORE TELANGANA STATE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
COMPLAINT NO.827 OF 2023
29th November 2023
Corum:

Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.), Hon’ble Chairperson
Sri LaxmiNarayanaJannu, Hon’ble Member
Sri K. SrinivasaRao, Hon’ble Member

Sri P Arogyam Reddy

…. Complainant
Versus

SmtSamalaPadmaja
Sri SamalaNarsi Reddy
M/s Vulcan Developers
Smt. BhupatiHemalatha
Sri DugaVara Prasad Setty
…. Respondent(s)
The present complaint is heard on the 31st day of October 2023 and the
16th day of November 2023, before this Regulatory Authority, with due
representation from the Complainant Advocate Sri Hari Hara Kumar, and the
Respondent Advocate D Srinivas Rao and this Authority, having considered the
submissions of both parties, hereby issues the following:
ORDER
2.

This order adjudicates upon the complaint under Section 31 of the Real

Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the
"RERD Act"), in conjunction with Rule 34(1) of the Telangana Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the
"Rules"). The complaint seeks the annulment of the RERA registration procured
by the Respondent.
1 of 6

3.

The relief sought pertains to the revocation of the registration granted to

the Respondents under Section 7 of the RE(R&D) Act, 2016. The observations
made during the proceedings are as follows:
i.

The complainant alleges that the Project sanctioned by RERA with
Registration No. PO240001731, dated 20.3.2020, in favor of M/s Vulcan
Developers, involves the construction of a Multi-Storied Residential
Building in Sy. No: 124/lu, Gopanpally Village, SerilingampallyMandal,
Rangareddy Dist., Telangana State, under GHMC Limits. The complaint
revolves around the purported fabrication and falsification of documents
by Mr. S.N. Reddy and Mrs.SamalaPadmaja to obtain Ac. 3 - 00 Gts land
in survey number 124/luGopanpally village, SerilingampallyMandal.

ii.

The complainant contends that Sale Deeds 1) 3405 of 2013, 2) 3406 of
2013, and 3)

3407 of 2013, created by Mr. S.N.

Reddy and

Mrs.SamalaPadmaja, misrepresent the familial connection to the original
landowner, KavaliMalliaiah S/o KavaliRamaiah. The complainant asserts
that the Sale Deeds are fabricated and fictitious, supported by incorrect
death certificates and family member certificates. Additionally, the
complainant

alleges

the

use

of

a

non-existent

NOC

ref.

No.

E1/6719/2007 for deceptive purposes.
iii.

The complainant argues that the said Sale Deeds, used to obtain
permissions from GHMC and RERA registration (PO2400001731, dated:
20.03.2020), are under challenge in a civil suit (O.S.No. 1303/2017) on
the file of the Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy at Kukatpally. The
complainant highlights discrepancies in the documents submitted and
asserts that the actions of the Respondents in collaboration with GHMC
authorities, amount to misconduct.

iv.

The complainant seeks immediate action against S.N. Reddy, Padmaja,
and M/s Vulcan Developers. The complainant also urges the cancellation
of RERA Registration No. PO2400001731, dated: 20.03.2020, and related
GHMC building permissions. Additionally, the complainant also prayed
2 of 6

to pass an interim order to stop the construction work, providing
disposal of the complaint.
4.

The Respondent in their counter vehemently expresses a strong objection

to the referenced complaint, following as:
i.

Characterizing it as an apparent endeavor at blackmail and coercion. The
Respondent firmly asserts that Mr. P. Arogyam Reddy and M/s. U & A
Infra Projects lack the legal standing to maintain any complaint against
them (Respondents No.1 to 4). This position is grounded in the assertion
that M/s. U &A Infra Projects is, in essence, a fraudulent entity engaging
in blackmail tactics.

ii.

The Respondent's contention is supported by evidence indicating that
Mr. P. Arogyam Reddy's representations to this authority are false and
fictitious. The alleged ownership of land in Survey No.124/Ka is
disputed, and the involved sale deed (No.4495/2021) is deemed
fraudulent. The original owners, represented by their GPA holders,
settled the property in question through a composite sale deed of 1964
and a subsequent gift deed in 2017.

iii.

Furthermore, it is pertinent to note that a civil suit (OS.No.1303/2017)
was

initiated

against

the

Respondents,

seeking

various

reliefs.

Subsequently, withdrawal memos and affidavits were filed, allowing
partial permission against the share of one owner while the land
pertaining to M/s. U &A Infra Projects remains pending consideration.
iv.

The complaint fails to acknowledge these legal developments and
inaccurately represents the ownership status and legal proceedings
related to the disputed land. Additionally, it is brought to the attention of
this Authority that the complainant has engaged in parallel legal actions,
such as filing a writ petition (WP No.11352/2017) and pursuing
impleading

petitions,

without

disclosing

the

compromise

in

OS.No.1303/2017.
3 of 6

v.

In light of the above, the Respondent contends that the complaint lacks
merit, and M/s. U &A Infra Projects, along with Mr. P. Arogyam Reddy,
are using false allegations with the intention of extortion. The alleged
fraudulent sale deed, mentioned in the complaint, is being challenged in
the competent courts.

vi.

Moreover, it is crucial to recognize that this authority should refrain from
deciding matters that are already sub judice in OS.No.1303/2017 and
WP.No.8221/2021.

The

legal

proceedings

supported

by

relevant

documentation affirm the legitimate ownership and the lawfulness of the
obtained building permissions and occupancy certificates for the project
undertaken by M/s. Vulcan Developers.
5.

On the basis of the above submissions and pleadings, as relief in the

complaint filed by the Complainant is concerned though the sub section of 1 of
section 7 of the RE(R&D) Act encourages revocation of the Registration in
certain circumstances. The Authority observes that as the title dispute is yet
pending before the Competent court and revocation under section 7 of the
RE(R&D) Act, 2016 may be inappropriate at this stage, the authority will not be
getting into the merits of the title dispute of the present project, and in cases of
such disputes, the complainants first shall seek recourse with the civil court. It
is not denied that the disputed matter is already pending before the competent
authority between the present complainants and the Respondents. Therefore, if
the complainants perceive any form of illegal activity on the part of the
Respondents regarding their right over the land of the Real Estate disputed
project, they can seek redress from the Civil Court or the Appropriate
Authority. This Authority as such cannot grant the relief in the present
Complaint.
6.

However, this Authority most significantly observes that the Form B and

original RERA Application filed before TS RERA incorrectly stated that there are
no pendency of litigation cases, thereby suppressing the pertinent information
4 of 6

regarding an ongoing case before the District Court, namely OS.No.1303/2017.
This filing of case occurred prior to the submission of the application for
registration under TS RERA concerning the aforementioned property, thereby
constituting a direct violation of Section 4(2)(1)(b) of the Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Act and Rule 14(1)(d) of the Telangana
State Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules.
7.

In view of the observations and discussion made above, this Authority

hereby passes order as under and issues the following direction under section
37 and 38 of RE(R&D) Act:
i.

The Respondent, M/s Vulcan Developers, is directed to pay Rs.
13,00,000/- (Rupees Thirteen lakhs), which is 0.5% of the total
estimated cost of the real estate project submitted to this authority at the
time of filing an application for registration, as a penalty under sections
60 and 61 of the Act. The penalty is imposed for furnishing incomplete
information and suppressing facts in the application to TS RERA, and for
filing Form B dated 04.10.2022, stating that there is no pendency of
litigations over the subject project. The penalty shall be payable in favour
of TS RERA FUNDS through a Demand Draft or online payment to A/c
No.50100595798191, HDFC Bank, IFSC Code: HDFC0007036, within a
period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

ii.

The Respondent, M/s Vulcan Developers is hereby directed to furnish an
affidavit to TS RERA, forthwith furnishing particulars of civil suit
pending for the purpose of updating the status of the pending litigation
concerning the aforementioned project. Since the matter is subjudice, it
is needless to mention that the promoter shall be under obligation to
compensate the allottee(s) in case of loss caused due to defective title of
the land on which project is being developed as envisaged under section
18(2) of the RE(R&D) Act of 2016.

8.

In the view of the ongoing civil litigation and the nature of the dispute,

this authority is of the view that it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter at
5 of 6

this stage. The complainant's claims are intertwined with the civil proceedings,
and it is only appropriate for the civil court to decide on the ownership and
possession of the property.
9.

The complaint is accordingly disposed off.

10.

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 receipt of this Order.

Sd/Sri. K. Srinivas Rao, Hon’ble
Member
TS RERA

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sri. Laxmi NaryanaJannu,

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

Hon’ble Member

Hon’ble Chairperson

TS RERA

TS RERA

6 of 6