In a recent ruling by the Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA), a panel made up of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana, K. Srinivasa Rao, and Laxmi Narayana Jannu mandated a construction company to address and fix structural issues in their project. This comes after the property was handed over to the new homeowners, in accordance with Section 14(3) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
The matter arose when a homebuyer, who had bought his apartment in September 2019, voiced concerns about the construction company. The complaints ranged from the poor quality of the construction, false promises made by the company, delays in the project, and amenities that were promised but not delivered. Even after the RERA registration expired ten months prior, the construction and handover of the property remained unfinished.
In the agreement signed on September 29, 2019, the homebuyer was entitled to a rent of Rs. 5 per square foot from September 29, 2020, to September 29, 2021. However, this rent has not been paid, and the construction company ignored multiple attempts at renewal. After several disputes, a delayed rent of Rs. 2.5 lakhs was finally settled last month.
Conditions in the G-Block of the property were reported as being terrible, with problems such as dust, lack of maintenance, and a non-functional lift. Promised features, including plasterwork, door polish, painting, intercom, and electrical wiring, were left incomplete. The homebuyer had to pay for most of the internal work, including plastering, painting, intercom installation, and electrical wiring, out of his own pocket, without any compensation.
The homebuyer also paid Rs. 1.5 lakhs for a club membership fee, which was never handed over to the association. Moreover, amenities like the STP plant, intercom, designer landscape, drainage and garbage management, 24-hour security, deluxe construction, solar fencing, car wash area, and children’s play area were all missing.
The homebuyer claimed that the RERA website contained false information and listed unresolved issues with the G-Block, including parking allotment, construction waste removal, lift functionality, painting, cleaning, electrical corrections, and seepage problems. He sought the authority’s intervention to address these issues and asked the construction company to deliver all the amenities promised in the project brochure.
In order to reach a decision, the Authority referred to an inspection report of the G-Block of the property. The report, conducted on 04.03.2024, highlighted several structural flaws in the project, such as single-coated paint areas needing double coating, substandard electrical wiring, missing intercom facilities, safety risks from an accessible transformer area, non-functional STP machinery, severe seepage in basements and pool area, water ingress in the cellar and lift pits, improper water connections, missing clubhouse furniture and gym equipment, absent CCTV cameras, incomplete landscapes, replaced play area with parking, missing signboards, damaged pathways, and missing project documents submitted to the society.
As a result, the authority instructed the construction company to rectify these identified defects within 60 days. This included applying a double coating where necessary, ensuring electrical wiring met standards, providing intercom connections, and erecting a compound wall near the transformer area for child safety.
Moreover, the construction company was directed to ensure the proper operation of the STP machinery and rectify structural defects causing seepage in basements and the pool area. Measures were also to be taken to prevent water ingress in the cellar and lift pits with appropriate flooring and drains. The company was also asked to provide separate water connections for each block, drill an additional borewell, and provide minimal furniture and gym equipment for the clubhouse. It was also ordered to install CCTV cameras in common areas, adhere to sanctioned plans for landscaping, include a play area, and provide signboards in driveways and parking areas. The company was further required to repair damaged pathway tiles and promptly submit all original project documents to the society.
The case was titled Sri Nishanth Garikipati & Ors. vs. M/s Shiva Shakthi Constructions and the citation was Complaint No.1834 of 2023.
To sum up, this judgment underscores the importance of builders living up to the promises made to homebuyers. It serves as a reminder to all construction companies of their obligations under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and the consequences of failing to adhere to them.
