TGRERA stops Pacifica Constructions from cancelling Hyderabad flat over Rs 7 lakh dispute
HYDERABAD: The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TGRERA) has stopped Pacifica Constructions Pvt Ltd and its representatives from canceling the allotment of a flat in its “Aavas Hyderabad” project only because of a disputed extra demand of Rs 7,10,415. The Authority has also barred them from selling or transferring the flat until a complaint filed by a homebuyer is decided.
This temporary order was made by K. Srinivasa Rao, a member of TGRERA, on September 30, 2026, in Complaint No. 359 of 2026. The complainant is Bondili Saritha from Patha Peta, Nuzvid, Krishna District. The respondents are Pacifica Constructions Pvt Ltd, represented by people from Nebula Infraspace LLP, Nebula Aavas Hyderabad, Miyapur, as well as Mamta Shahani from Ahmedabad, Gujarat, and Vikram Daitha from Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
The complaint was filed under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and the Telangana Real Estate Rules, 2017, about the registered project “Aavas Hyderabad.” The complainant asked for temporary protection for the allotment of Flat No. BW2-903.
The complainant said she booked the flat after the respondents made certain claims and then signed an Agreement of Sale on May 25, 2018. The total price agreed was Rs 17,94,025, not including taxes and amenity charges. She has paid a total of Rs 18,36,746 for the flat. The agreement said she would get possession within 60 months, which means the deadline was May 25, 2023. She claims she did not get possession by that date.
Additional demand disputed
The complainant also said the respondents asked for an extra Rs 7,10,415 for different reasons and demanded payment before registering and handing over the flat. She claims they have not provided enough supporting documents or proper accounts to explain the demand.
She asked for temporary relief to make sure the allotment and flat were protected until the complaint was decided. She wanted the Authority to stop the respondents from canceling the allotment or selling, transferring, or creating any third-party rights over the flat.
At the first hearing, the respondents’ lawyer appeared and asked for more time to respond. At the next hearing, they asked for more time again. However, because the complainant was worried about the allotment being canceled or the flat being sold, and since the documents provided were not challenged, the Authority decided to protect the flat until the complaint is resolved. The Authority also made it clear that the respondents not filing their response yet does not mean they admit to the complainant’s claims.
After looking at the documents and hearing both sides, including reviewing the Agreement of Sale and payment receipts, the Authority found there was enough reason to protect the allotment. Because of the dispute about the extra demand and the complainant’s concerns, the Authority chose to keep things as they are and not let any third-party rights be created until the complaint is decided.
Order
So, the Authority ordered that the respondents cannot cancel the allotment of Flat No. BW2-903 just because of the disputed extra demand of Rs 7,10,415. They also cannot sell, transfer, or give any third-party rights over the flat until the next hearing on October 15, 2026.
The next hearing will be on October 15, 2026. The respondents must file their response by then. The temporary protection stays in place until the complaint is finally decided or the Authority gives further orders. If anyone breaks these orders, action will be taken according to the law.
