Hyderabad Plot Dispute Ends With Refund For Buyers
A Telangana real estate tribunal has upheld an order directing a developer to refund ₹36.58 lakh to buyers who paid most of the agreed amount for a residential plot but did not receive a registered sale deed. The ruling reinforces the importance of timely registration and contractual compliance in property transactions, while highlighting protections available to buyers under the state’s real estate regulatory framework.
The Telangana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (TG REAT) upheld an October 2025 order of the Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TG RERA) concerning a 355.56-square-yard plot in DLF Garden City, located in Nandigama mandal of Rangareddy district. The buyers had entered into an agreement of sale with Amacon Developers in April 2021 for ₹37.38 lakh. They subsequently paid ₹36.58 lakh through bank transfers and a cheque, leaving ₹80,000 payable at the time of registration. According to the case details, the buyers remained willing to complete the transaction but alleged that registration was repeatedly delayed. They later discovered that the same plot had been sold to another purchaser and approached TG RERA seeking a refund along with interest.
TG RERA ordered the developer to return the ₹36.58 lakh paid by the buyers, together with interest at 10.75% annually calculated from April 9, 2021. The buyers subsequently appealed, seeking to extend liability to other respondents involved in the dispute. The appellate tribunal, however, upheld the original relief. It found that Amacon had obtained rights relating to the property through agreements with the original developers and rejected the company’s position that it had acted only as an agent. The tribunal determined that the company had functioned as a promoter in the transaction. The ruling also noted that after receiving the buyers’ money, the developer did not complete the agreed sale and subsequently transferred the same plot to another purchaser. The tribunal did not hold the third-party purchaser liable, finding no evidence that the buyer was aware of the earlier agreement.
The decision has wider implications for the Telangana real estate market, where buyers often make substantial payments well before property registration is completed. A clear agreement alone does not eliminate the need for developers to maintain accurate title records and ensure that promised transactions are completed in accordance with applicable regulations. For homebuyers, the case also demonstrates the importance of maintaining payment records, sale agreements and correspondence relating to registration. Such documentation can become critical when disputes arise. The tribunal’s decision ultimately leaves the refund and interest order intact. For developers, it underscores the financial and regulatory consequences of failing to complete a committed property transaction, while for buyers it reinforces the role of regulatory mechanisms in resolving real estate disputes.
