Order Complaints No. 528 of 2025

BEFORE TELANGANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
[Under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016]
Dated: 2nd 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
Complaint No. 527 of 2025/TG RERA

Prashant N
(Flat No 302, Sipra Residency, Shivam road,
Opposite papajidhaba, Amberpet, Hyderabad-500013)

…Complainant
Versus
1. Dupati Nagaraju
(Flat N0 C-602, 6th floor, Phase-1,
Rainbow Vistas Mossapet, Kukatpally,
K.V. Rangareddy district, Hyderabad- 500085)
(Bharathi Builders, Registered partnership firm No 2098/2018,
Plot No 216, 3rd Floor, Lamba Trendz Unity, Kavuri hills, Phase-2
Madhapur, Hyderabad- 500033)

2. Mulpury Siva Rama Krishna
(Flat No 302/C, ATHENA-C, Lodha Casa Paradiso,
Sanathnagar, Hyderabad-500018)

3. Sunil Kumar Ahuja
…Respondents
Complaint No. 528 of 2025/TG RERA
Jyoti Ramesh Kankani
(H.No:- 2-2-1123/9/K, Janardhan Apts
Flat No 102, New nallakunta, Hyderabad- 500044)

…Complainant
Versus
1. Dupati Nagaraju
(Flat N0 C-602, 6th floor, Phase-1,
Rainbow Vistas Mossapet, Kukatpally,
K.V. Rangareddy district, Hyderabad- 500085)
(Bharathi Builders, Registered partnership firm No 2098/2018,
Plot No 216, 3rd Floor, Lamba Trendz Unity, Kavuri hills, Phase-2
Madhapur, Hyderabad- 500033)

2. Mulpury Siva Rama Krishna
(Flat No 302/C, ATHENA-C, Lodha Casa Paradiso,
Sanathnagar, Hyderabad-500018)

3. Sunil Kumar Ahuja
…Respondents
Complaint No. 529 of 2025/TG RERA
Manoj Kumar Bajaj
(H.No:- 7.1.555, Bajaj Nivas, Ameerpet,

Page 1 of 3

---

…Complainant
Versus
1. Dupati Nagaraju
(Flat N0 C-602, 6th floor, Phase-1,
Rainbow Vistas Mossapet, Kukatpally,
K.V. Rangareddy district, Hyderabad- 500085)
(Bharathi Builders, Registered partnership firm No 2098/2018,
Plot No 216, 3rd Floor, Lamba Trendz Unity, Kavuri hills, Phase-2
Madhapur, Hyderabad- 500033)

2. Mulpury Siva Rama Krishna
(Flat No 302/C, ATHENA-C, Lodha Casa Paradiso,
Sanathnagar, Hyderabad-500018)

3. Sunil Kumar Ahuja
…Respondents
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 “RE(R&D)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.
2.

It is the common case of all the Complainants that they booked respective residential

flats in the said project under separate Memoranda of Understanding executed in September–
October, 2021, agreed to a sale consideration of ₹3,800/- per sq. ft., and paid 25% of the
consideration as advance amounts to the Respondents, with an assurance that the project would
be completed and possession would be delivered within 24 months with a grace period of six
months.
3.

The Complainants allege that even after expiry of the stipulated period, no development

or construction activity has been commenced at the site and that the land forming part of the
project has subsequently been sold to a third party, thereby giving rise to the present complaints
seeking refund of the amounts paid along with interest and other consequential reliefs.
4.

The present batch of complaints was initially listed before the Telangana Real Estate

Regulatory Authority on 18.09.2025, on which date the Complainants as well as Respondents
No. 3 and 4 were present and Respondent 1 and 2 were absent.
5.

Thereafter, the matters were listed on several occasions from time to time from

27.11.2025 to 27.02.2026. While so, despite repeated opportunities being granted, the parties
failed to appear and prosecute the complaints diligently. On multiple dates of hearing, either one
or both parties remained absent, without any representation or request for adjournment.
Page 2 of 3

---

On 22.01.2026, only the Complainant in CC No. 529 of 2025 was present, while the

Complainants in the remaining matters and all the Respondents therein remained absent.
7.

The matters were finally posted to 27.02.2026. On the said date, when the matters were

taken up, both the Complainants and the Respondents remained absent. In view of the repeated
non-appearance of the parties, the complaints are liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.
8.

Therefore, this Authority is of the considered view that even after affording of number of

opportunities, the Complainants and the Respondents failed to appear and prosecute their case
diligently before this Authority. Given the Complainant's consistent absence, it is apparent that
they do not seek to pursue the matter. In lieu thereof, the present Complaints stands dismissed for
non-prosecution.

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sri K. Srinivasa Rao,
Hon’ble Member,
TG RERA

Sri Laxmi Narayana Jannu,
Hon’ble Member,
TG RERA

Dr. N. Satyanarayana, IAS (Retd.),
Hon’ble Chairperson,
TG RERA

Page 3 of 3

---