Hyderabad: TGRERA orders Tulasi Constructions to handover flat to buyer without delay

Tulasi Constructions, Bhuvanteza Infra in Hyderabad asked to handover flat without delay

By Sistla Dakshina Murthy
Published on : 19 Feb 2026 9:32 AM IST

Hyderabad: TGRERA orders Tulasi Constructions to handover flat to buyer without delay

`Tulasi Lake Front’,  Tulasi Constructions, Bhuvanteza Infra asked to handover flat without delay

Hyderabad: Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TG RERA) has ordered Tulasi Constructions and Bhuvanteza Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. to immediately hand over a flat to a buyer who has been waiting for over two years despite making full payment of Rs 31 lakh.

The Authority also held both companies jointly and severally liable to execute and register Flat No.103, Block 18, in the `Tulasi Lake Front’ project at Suraram, and to deliver peaceful physical possession to the complainant within the stipulated timeframe.

Full payment made, registration delayed

The complaint was filed by V. Solman Raju under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, alleging that he had paid the entire agreed sale consideration of ₹31,00,000 for the flat, but the registration was being deliberately delayed.

According to the order, the complainant initially entered into an Agreement of Sale dated December 24, 2020, with Bhuvanteza Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., which was acting as the marketing channel partner.

Subsequently, a second Agreement dated October 17, 2022, was executed by Tulasi Constructions, acknowledging receipt of the entire sale consideration through the marketing partner.

Despite this, the flat was neither registered nor possession handed over within the committed timeline.

RERA registration timeline violated

The project obtained building permission on January 21, 2022, and secured RERA registration on April 4, 2022. As per the agreed terms, possession was to be delivered within 24 months from the date of registration, which expired on April 4, 2024.

The Authority observed that even after expiry of the committed period, the flat had not been registered nor possession handed over, amounting to a clear violation of contractual and statutory obligations.

Promoter cannot escape liability

Rejecting the plea of Tulasi Constructions that there was no privity of contract with the complainant, TG RERA noted that both agreements and payment receipts clearly established the involvement of both respondents in the transaction.

The Authority held that internal financial disputes between the promoter and marketing agent cannot defeat the statutory rights of an allottee under the Real Estate Act. It emphasized that obligations under Section 17 of the Act to execute and register the conveyance deed are mandatory and non-delegable.

Pattern of violations noted

TG RERA also took note of multiple complaints against the respondents. It was observed that Bhuvanteza Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. had previously been penalised Rs 8.57 lakh for violations under the Act and was declared a defaulter in another complaint in July 2025.

The Authority cautioned that it would not tolerate deliberate indifference or evasive conduct by promoters seeking to shift liability through internal arrangements.

Conditional directions on mortgage issue

The earlier agreement had referred to the unit being marketed as a “mortgaged” unit. However, the Authority found no conclusive material on record proving the existence of a subsisting encumbrance.

Accordingly, it issued conditional directions:

If the flat is not under any subsisting mortgage, the respondents must execute and register the Sale Deed within 30 days from the date of the order.

If the flat is under mortgage, Tulasi Constructions must first secure its release and complete registration within 15 days from the date of such release.

Both respondents have been held jointly and severally responsible for compliance.

Warning of penalty for non-compliance

TG RERA warned that failure to comply within the stipulated timelines would attract proceedings under Section 63 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act for non-compliance, in addition to other regulatory action.

With these directions, the complaint was disposed of by the Authority.

Next Story