RERA Relief For Homebuyers

Patna: The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Bihar, on Friday passed an order providing relief to thousands of flat buyers stuck in stalled projects.

The order addresses the issue of ‘lapsed’ building projects, where promoters fail to complete the project within the stipulated period.

A double bench of RERA, comprising chairman Vivek Kumar Singh and member S D Jha, delivered the order related to the ‘IOB Nagar Block B’ project of Agrani Homes Private Limited.

They endorsed the proposal from the buyers’ (allottees’) association to complete the remaining development work themselves.

The matter was referred to the state govt as mandated by Section 8 of the RERA Act. Once the state govt responds, the project will be handed over to the buyers’ association, which will get it registered with RERA Bihar and proceed with the completion.

This decision is expected to bring relief to buyers of other stalled projects as well, allowing them to form associations and complete their projects through a similar legal process.

Several petitions were filed by homebuyers, including Shweta, Geeta Kumari, Kriti Kumari, Mukesh Kumar and Dr Rana Nagendra Kumar Singh, who had paid amounts ranging from Rs 8.25 lakh to rs 27.19 lakh to Agrani Homes Private Limited. However, the promoter failed to complete the project on time.

“The promoter became a defaulter by not paying the refund amounts mentioned in previous orders related to the same project,” the Authority said. The project’s registration lapsed on August 31, 2019, and the promoter showed no interest in seeking an extension or completing the work.

The promoter neither appeared in the complaint case nor responded to the notices sent for hearings on April 24, July 3, September 18 and October 16. Given the circumstances, the Authority decided the case based on the available facts and records.

The homebuyers had submitted a self-declaration about forming the Agrani IOB Block B Owners’ Association and provided an estimated cost of the remaining construction work through an empanelled engineer.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/patna/rera-grants-relief-to-homebuyers-stuck-in-stalled-projects/articleshow/114362194.cms

Homebuyers’ body demands setting up of Rera Monitoring Committee

The largest body of homebuyers has demanded setting up of a Rera Monitoring Committee (RMC) while flagging how real estate regulators (RERAs) have failed in effective implementation of the real estate regulation law. It has cited how several housing projects have not been registered despite the mandatory provision and also delay in completion of projects which started after the central law came into effect.

The Forum For People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE), which had campaigned for the RERA law, has referred to the findings and recommendations of the Amitabh Kant committee set up by the housing ministry to seek greater monitoring of regulators’ performance. It has suggested that the committee may be requested to holistically look into all the issues of the real estate sector and recommend the steps needed to be taken to ensure that situations like delayed projects don’t arise in future.

In a letter addressed to housing minister Hardeep Singh Puri, the FPCE has urged that the RMC should be composed of homebuyers, distinguished independent individuals and reputable non-profit organisations. “This committee should exclude any involvement of builders or their organisations. The RMC’s primary role would be to scrutinise the deviations, operational practices and overall functionality and intent of the RERA authorities, ensuring they are aligned with the true spirit of RERA implementation,” it said.

Referring to the high-powered committee’s recommendation of “mandatory registration with RERA” of all real estate projects, the FPCE said the promoters were legally obligated to register their projects as per the central law.

On the panel’s observation that developers were required to maintain and provide detailed records related to the project, which include financial statements, legal documents and construction status reports, the FPCE said promoters were not adhering to the mandate of updating project information every quarter and the regulatory authorities were not taking adequate actions to enforce this requirement. “Instead of imposing penalties for non-compliance, they seem to be only issuing notices after a significant period of default, which is certainly inadequate enforcement,” the homebuyers’ body said.

The FPCE has also said the committee’s recommendation, which includes projects that were started after the enactment of RERA and delayed by more than two years, can participate in the state government/ RERA led resolution process suggests that even projects initiated after the implementation of the law are experiencing delays and issues. It said this again raises doubts about the effectiveness and functioning of RERA in preventing project delays and ensuring timely completion.

On the recommendation that a fresh three-year extension may be given to all projects at no payment to authority, the homebuyers’ entity said the proposed extension does not consider timeline needed for completion of projects on a case to case basis which in many cases may be much less than three year period.

“It also lacks a compensatory provision for suffering homebuyers. This could potentially offer relief to builders but at the detrimental cost and continued suffering of homebuyers who have already endured prolonged project delays and an additional three year extension without any compensation may completely break them both financially and mentally,” the FPCE said.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/homebuyers-body-demands-setting-up-of-rera-monitoring-committee/amp_articleshow/103231425.cms

Gurgaon RERA To Verify Consent In Case Of Building Plans Change

The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) of Gurugram has decided to check the veracity of the two thirds consent submitted by the real estate promoters in the case of any changes in the layout plans or any revisions in the building plans in a real estate project.

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 mandates changes or revisions, as the case may be, in the layout or building plans subject to a two-thirds of consent of allottees as a must. The authority usually issues a public notice inviting objections and in case no objection is received, it allows the changes. In case any or some objection is received, it is heard and the case is decided on merit.

However, as a matter of abundant caution, the authority now on will get the consent checked to the extent possible. The idea behind this effort is to protect the sanctity of allottee’s rights under the RERA Act, said the authority.

As per the Section 14 of RERA Act, the promoter shall not make any additions and alterations in the sanctioned plans, layout plans and specifications and the nature of fixtures, fittings and amenities described therein in respect of the apartment, plot or building, as the case may be, which are agreed to be taken, without the previous consent of that person: provide that the promoter may make such minor additions or alterations as may be required by the allottee, or such minor change or alterations as may be required by the allottee, or such minor change or alterations as may be necessary due to architectural and structural reasons duly recommended and verified by an authorized Architect or Engineer after proper declaration and intimation to the allottee.

Source: https://www.rprealtyplus.com/news-views/gurgaon-rera-to-verify-consent-in-case-of-building-plans-change-116702.html

Haryana RERA To Check Consent For Layout Changes Submitted By Developers

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016 mandates changes or revisions — as the case may be — to layouts or building plans provided two-thirds of the allottees say yes to it.

GURUGRAM: The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Rera) in the city has decided to check “to the extent possible” the veracity of two-thirds consent of allottees that real estate promoters submit in case they want any change in their layouts or a revision of their building plans.

The decision was taken at a meeting of Rera officials on Monday.

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016 mandates changes or revisions — as the case may be — to layouts or building plans provided two-thirds of the allottees say yes to it.

According to Section 14 of the Haryana Rera Act, “the promoter shall not make any additions and alterations in the sanctioned plans, layout plans and specifications and the nature of fixtures, fittings and amenities described therein in respect of the apartment, plot or building, as the case may be, which are agreed to be taken, without the previous consent of that person: provided that the promoter may make such minor additions or alterations as may be required by the allottee, or such minor change or alterations as may be necessary due to architectural and structural reasons duly recommended and verified by an authorised architect or engineer after proper declaration and intimation to the allottee.”

Section 14 (2)(II) of the Act also says that the “promoter shall not make any other alterations or additions in the sanctioned plans, layout plans and specifications or the buildings or the common areas within the project without the previous written consent of at least two-thirds of the allottees, other than the promoter”.

Before allowing the alterations, the authority usually issues a public notice inviting objections. In case there are no objections, it allows the changes. In case some objections are received, the case is decided on merit.

“As a matter of abundant caution, the real estate authority will from now on get the consent checked to the extent possible. The idea behind this effort is to protect the sanctity of allottees’ rights under the Rera Act,” a senior official said.

Advocate Harshit Batra, who deals in cases related to properties, backed the Rera move. “This will not only save the parties from any future litigation involving the approval of revised plans but will also help in the smooth implementation of revised development.”

Source: https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/rera/haryana-rera-to-check-consent-for-layout-changes-submitted-by-developers/113210972

Supreme Court Holds Landowners Liable Along With Builder For Deficiencies In Flat Constructions

The Supreme Court recently held that a revocation of power of attorney executed between landowners and builder for developing their land would not absolve the landowners from being jointly and severally liable along with the builder in a consumer case for deficiency of service.

The Court observed that the Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) between the builder and the landowners remained operative even after the revocation of the power of attorney. It was also held that the expression ‘henceforth’ used in the revocation letter to the builder meant that landowners would be ceased of any liability for builder’s actions that occurs subsequent to the termination and that would not exclude the landowners’ liability for the agreements that the builder entered into with the buyers before the termination.

“It further appears that though allegedly the said power of attorney was revoked by the appellants vide the letter dated 12-8-2014, the JVA has not been revoked so far and the same still continues to be in force.

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents, in the letter dated 12-8-2014, the appellants had stated to be not liable “Henceforth”, i.e. after the said letter was sent. The appellants therefore were bound by the acts/deeds of the Respondent No.2 carried out pursuant to the irrevocable Power of Attorney till it was terminated, in accordance with law.”

The bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and SC Sharma was considering the challenge to the order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi dated November 28, 2017 which upheld the order of the State Commission in holding the appellants and Respondent no.2 liable for deficiency in service for the completion of the construction of dwelling units to flat buyer who are the respondents.

The appellants who are landowners, and respondent no.2 (builder) had entered into a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) for building flats and selling them subsequently.

The appellants had also executed an Irrevocable Power of Attorney (IPA) in favour of the respondent no.1 on July 6, 2013. On the premise of the said IPA, the respondent no.2 entered into sale agreements with respondents for the sale of the flat units.

The respondents subsequently filed a complaint before the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for being jointly and severally liable for unfair trade practices and deficiency of service in completing and handing over the possession of the6 promised flat units by the appellant and the respondent no.2

The State Commission in its order dated July 10, 2017 held (1) the appellants and respondent no.2 to be liable and directed them to hand over the possession to the complainants in a span of 6 months from date of order; (2) execute sale deed of the units as the agreement to sell between the parties; (3) the respondent no.2 to give compensation of Rs 1,00,000/- to each of the complainants for physical and mental harassment.

The said decision was upheld by the NCDRC which observed the appellants had only cancelled the JVA and IPA on August 18, 2014 which was much after the agreement entered between the Respondent no.1 and flat buyers/ remaining respondents. Noting the observation from the State Commission’s order, NCDRC stated :

“The State Commission concluded that at the time of the agreement between the builder and the complainants, the JVA and IPA were very much operative. It is evident, therefore, that the appellants cannot wash their hands off from the matter, as it would result in grave injustice to the complainants consumers.”

Arguments By The Counsels

Senior Advocate Kailash Vasdev appearing for the appellants argued that the appellants revoked the IPA granted to respondent no.2 on August 12, 2014 along with a public notice and hence could not be held liable for the acts done by the respondent no.2.

It was additionally argued that since the appellants were not privy to the agreement between the respondent no.2 and flat buyer/remaining respondents, a complaint against them under the Consumer Protection Act would not be maintainable.

Senior Advocate Siddarth Dave representing respondent no.2 had submitted that respondent no.2 was ready to complete the construction work and honour the JVA .

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayan appearing for one the flat buyers/ remaining respondents highlighted that the IPA revocation letter of August 12, 2014 stated that the appellants will not be liable for the acts of the Respondent No.2 “henceforth”- that is acts done after the revocation letter is communicated.

Appellants Jointly & Severally Liable As Per The Revocation Letter; JVA Was Operative Even After Revocation Of Power Of Attorney : Bench Observes

The Bench made two key observations is holding the appellants liable jointly and severally along with the respondent no.2 – (1) the appellants while revoking the power of attorney executed to the respondent no.2 had not revoked the JVA, which continues to stay operative and (2) the use of the expression ‘henceforth’ in the revocation letter by the appellants would mean that they cease their liability only for the actions of respondent no.2 after August 12, 2014 and this wouldnot exclude them from the liability of the builder’s conduct of entering into agreements with the flat buyers.

“It further appears that though allegedly the said power of attorney was revoked by the appellants vide the letter dated 12-8-2014, the JVA has not been revoked so far and the same still continues to be in force.

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents, in the letter dated 12-8-2014, the appellants had stated to be not liable “Henceforth”, i.e. after the said letter was sent. The appellants therefore were bound by the acts/deeds of the Respondent No.2 carried out pursuant to the irrevocable Power of Attorney till it was terminated, in accordance with law.”

It was also observed that appellants have also taken against respondent no.2 for non-compliance of the JVA, implying it be remain operative between the parties.

“It is also not denied that the appellants have not taken any action whatsoever against the respondent No.2 with regard to the alleged non-compliance of the terms and conditions of JAV by the said Respondent. Under the circumstances, it does not lie in the mouth of the appellants to say that the appellants are not liable for the acts of Respondent No.2.”

The Court therefore upheld the decision of the NCDRC and refused to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal was dismissed as being devoid of any merits.

Source: https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/supreme-court-holds-landowners-liable-along-with-builder-for-deficiencies-in-flat-constructions-268714

Homebuyers’ Body Seeks Housing Ministry’s Intervention Over RERA Conciliation Forum

A pan-India homebuyers’ body has approached the Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs (MoHUA), raising concerns over the functioning of conciliation forums established by the Real Estate Regulatory Authorities (RERAs) across several states.

The Forum for People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE) has called on the Ministry to take immediate action, urging it to issue guidelines that would ensure the independence and impartiality of such forums across all states. It has also requested a suspension of all conciliation forum activities until these guidelines are in place.

The association, for instance, has pointed out irregularities in the Conciliation Forum constituted by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA). In a letter addressed to the ministry, the FPCE has alleged that the forum is heavily skewed in favour of developers, compromising the rights and interests of homebuyers.

The homebuyers’ association has raised issues regarding the very constitution of the MahaRERA Conciliation Forum, arguing that it oversteps the powers granted under section 32 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA).

The section allows for the promotion of dispute settlement forums by consumer or promoter associations, but the FPCE asserts that MahaRERA has taken the authority into its own hands by not only constituting the forum but also playing an active role in it. The Secretary of MahaRERA currently chairs the forum, which the FPCE claims is a clear conflict of interest.

“The forum’s composition itself is evidence of its bias. With only one consumer organization represented compared to three developer organizations, and an individual representative ratio of two to six in favor of builders, the forum’s structure appears to favor developers,” Abhay Upadhyay, president, FPCE, told ET. The association also pointed out the lack of transparency in the selection criteria for consumer organizations, suggesting that these may have been handpicked to align with the forum’s pro-developer stance.

The FPCE alleges that complainants are being pressured to engage with the conciliation forum. Those who refuse and choose to pursue their complaints directly with MahaRERA are reportedly met with delays and postponements, with hearings being dragged out over the years. “This situation leaves complainants with little choice but to settle disputes through the forum, where they are unlikely to receive fair treatment,” said Upadhyay, who is also a member of the RERA Central Advisory Committee (CAC).

The FPCE has also criticized the lack of transparency surrounding the forum’s proceedings.

According to Upadhyay, there is no publicly available information on the outcomes of the cases handled by the forum, nor on how many of its orders have been enforced against non-compliant developers. The association contends that this opacity undermines the very purpose of RERA, which is to bring transparency and accountability to the real estate sector.

Moreover, the FPCE has expressed concerns about the broader implications of this forum, pointing out that once a case enters the conciliation process, it cannot be revisited in full by MahaRERA, even if the builder fails to comply with the conciliation orders. This, the association argues, further tilts the balance in favour of developers, who can easily bypass stricter regulatory oversight by engaging in the conciliation process.

In addition to its suggestions regarding conciliation forums, the FPCE has also recommended that a cooling-off period be instituted for RERA officials, barring them from joining real estate firms or associations for five years after leaving their positions.

The association’s concerns have been exacerbated by the fact that the former Chairman of MahaRERA, under whose tenure the conciliation forum was established, has since joined a developers’ organization. This has raised questions about the forum’s original intent, with the FPCE alleging that it was designed to protect the interests of developers rather than homebuyers.

Source: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/property-/-cstruction/homebuyers-body-seeks-housing-ministrys-intervention-over-rera-conciliation-forum/articleshow/112784409.cms?from=mdr

Notify Norms On Project Closure, Home Buyers Urge K-RERA Chief

Seeking to end real estate developers’ non-compliance with pre-approved deadlines and fraudulent practices, the Karnataka Home Buyers Forum (KHBF) has appealed to the state’s new Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Rera) chairperson Rakesh Singh to issue a notification on guidelines for project closures and direct all builders and developers to comply with it.

Referring to a similar notification issued by Rera Odisha, KHBF has demanded that the same be emulated in Karnataka.

At a meeting last week, KHBF convenor Dhananjaya Padmanabhachar told Singh that most of the builders fail to comply with the pre-approved deadlines in completing their projects, due to which buyers undergo economic burden.

“After the registration of their properties as per the Rera Act, no builder in Bengaluru formally notifies the closure of the project and they instead walk away with all the benefits, including property titles which ideally should have been transferred to buyers’ associations,” Padmanabhachar explained.

He said, “Many builders assume that getting an occupancy certificate (OC) is the end of the project. Mere obtaining OC does not mean completion of the project. The builder has to facilitate the setting up of the residents’ association and handover of the title deeds, mother deed, and land records to the association. Besides, builders must initiate conveyance deeds… But none of these is happening in Bengaluru and all residents’ associations or buyers have been left in the lurch.”

Stating that a notification on project closures would help streamline all these anomalies, Padmanabhachar said, “Generally, the buyers would have deposited the money in an escrow account. Currently, the builder takes away any money left in the escrow account instead of passing this onto the residents/associations as security money for the maintenance of the structure over the next five years.” “At least this will help the associations take care of any structural damage to the buildings rather than asking all residents to pool in again,” he added.

KHBF members said resident welfare associations (RWAs) or individuals are fighting some of these anomalies. If the Rera issues a notification mandating all builders to comply with the project closure, the responsibility shifts to builders from RWAs, they argued. Padmanabhachar said Singh was positive about the requests. “The chairperson assured us that he will look into our demand and discuss it with the other members of the authority for appropriate actions,” he pointed out.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/notify-norms-on-project-closurehome-buyers-urge-k-rera-chief/articleshow/113066498.cms

MahaRERA Makes It Mandatory For Real Estate Developers To Mention Delivery Date Of Amenities And Occupation Certificate

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has made it mandatory for real estate developers to mention the exact date by which facilities and amenities will be made available to homebuyers along with the expected date of obtaining the occupation certificate (OC).

It will now be mandatory for real estate developers to specify the proposed date of delivery of these facilities and amenities as well as the area they will cover in Annexure-I of the Agreement for Sale. This provision, which is expected to help homebuyers, is non-negotiable and developers will not be at liberty to alter the same, the MahaRERA said in a statement on July 31.

MahaRERA has also made it mandatory for developers to provide details of the expected date of Occupancy Certificate (OC) for the project, size of the facilities and amenities, whether it is a project being constructed by the developer or has been acquired, if the project is free of Floor Space Index or not as per the rules and regulations of the local planning bodies, said the MahaRERA statement.

MahaRERA said that at the time of booking an apartment, real estate developers often offer attractive facilities and amenities to homebuyers. However, in most cases, these facilities and amenities are not complete even after the buyers move into the project. It has therefore now made it mandatory for the developers to specify the date of delivery of these facilities in the Agreement for Sale’s Annexure-I.

The MahaRERA said that amenities for which the delivery timelines will have to be mentioned in the agreement for sale include swimming pool, tennis court, badminton court, theatres, club house, gymnasium, table tennis area, squash court, giant chess area, garden, senior citizen zone, jogging track, juice bar, children play area, among others.

The move will make it binding on the developers not to violate delivery of the facilities and amenities as committed to the homebuyers, MahaRERA’s statement said.

The MahaRERA, in April 2024, had published a draft order on the issue and invited public suggestions and opinions. Thereafter, based on the feedback received, the MahaRERA has taken this decision.

“When advertising their new housing projects, developers often promote a variety of attractive facilities and amenities alongside the actual apartments. However, there is no mention of when the proposed facilities and amenities will actually be made available,” said Ajoy Mehta, chairman of MahaRERA.

“It has been observed that many homebuyers have been affected by these shortcomings and have taken a serious note of this issue. After providing all stakeholders ample opportunity to express their views, it has now been made mandatory to specify the delivery timeline for all the promised facilities and amenities in the Schedule II of the Agreement for Sale,” Mehta added.

Usually, larger housing projects are spread over multiple phases and in such instances, often, multiple amenities are made available only on completion of the last phase. To ensure residents in the earlier phases are aware about the availability of the facilities and amenities, it now is mandatory to provide a phase-wise and date-specific information of the same, according to MahaRERA.

Additionally, MahaRERA has mandated that developers provide a comprehensive detail of the facilities and amenities in Schedule-II of the Agreement for Sale.

“In the eventuality of any major revisions or changes or corrections or relocation of the specified facilities and amenities or public areas, an approval from MahaRERA is a must. Without such an approval, any and all changes will be considered invalid and illegal,” the MahaRERA said in a statement.

“It will also be mandatory for the developers to obtain consent of two-third of the residents if changes are about location and numbers of families and amenities. In other words, developers will not be able to make changes unilaterally, the MahaRERA statement further added.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/real-estate/maharera-makes-it-mandatory-for-real-estate-developers-to-mention-delivery-date-of-amenities-and-occupation-certificate-101722425501541.html

MahaRERA To Hold Fifth Exam For 5,260 Real Estate Agents In Maharashtra To Protect Home Buyers’ Interests

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has announced that a total of 5,260 real estate agents will appear for the fifth competency examination to be conducted by the Authority on July 29 across 24 centres in Maharashtra.

Of the 5,260 candidates, 3,081 are from the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR), 1,533 from Pune, 518 from Nagpur, the MahaRERA said in a statement.

According to MahaRERA, till now four batches have appeared for the examination and 9,295 real estate agents have cleared it.

The MahaRERA in January 2023 had made it mandatory for real estate agents to undergo training and obtain the prescribed certificate of registration. A failure to do so will lead to MahaRERA suspending registrations of such real estate agents.

There are around 47,000 agents registered across Maharashtra. Of these, registrations of 13,785 agents have been cancelled due to non-renewal. In April, MahaRERA had suspended registration of over 20,000 agents who failed to comply with the training and certification requirements.

“They will have to comply with the mandatory requirement to resume operations in the real estate sector. Due to the action initiated, the number of candidates appearing for the upcoming test has increased to over 5,000 from around 1,700 in the previous edition,” the MahaRERA said in a statement.

“In the real estate sector, an ‘agent’ plays a crucial role for homebuyers and developers. Therefore, it is imperative for the agents to be well-versed in the provisions of RERA Act. Therefore, MahaRERA has made it mandatory for the agents to undergo training, pass an exam to obtain certification. Failure to comply within the stipulated time frame to obtain this certification will result in tough decisions,” Ajoy Mehta, Chairman of MahaRERA said.

In February 2023, the MahaRERA had directed real estate agents to make half-yearly progress reports public. This mandates furnishing information on projects where they have been designated by developers to handle sales.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/real-estate/maharera-to-hold-fifth-exam-for-5-260-real-estate-agents-in-maharashtra-to-protect-home-buyers-interests-101721802816576.html

Promoters Must Publish Project QR Codes In Every Brochure & Advertisement: UP-RERA

NEW DELHI: Uttar Pradesh real estate regulatory authority (UP-RERA) has now assigned a unique QR code to every new projects being registered with it and to every project with live or valid registration.

Buyers can scan this code to get all the details of the project from the portal of UP-RERA and verify the information about the projects provided by the promoter in the advertisements.

Sanjay Bhoosreddy, chairman, UP-RERA said, “To make sure that the consumer readily gets complete and correct information about the project and the promoter, we have assign a unique QR code to the projects and made it mandatory for the promoters to give this on all the documents shared with the allottees and all the promotions and advertisements.”

In order to ensure that the benefits of this facility actually reaches the consumers, the authority has made it mandatory for the promoters to publish this project QR code in all sort of documents shared with the allottees such as the booking forms, allotment letters, BBAs and all the advertisements for promotion and marketing of the project.

All details related to the project, such as land documents, approved layouts and maps, project specifications and amenities, start and completion dates, bank accounts, promoters, co-promoters, registered agents, quarterly progress report (Q.P.R), O.C. or C.C., other requisite and NOCs will be available.

RERA had observed that the home buyers have no easily accessible medium of verifying the features, amenities and other details mentioned in such advertisements and have to rely solely on the information disseminated by the promoters or the real estate agents. But hence forward, the same advertisement will become the source of verification of the information relating to the project.

Source: https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/rera/promoters-must-publish-project-qr-codes-in-every-brochure-advertisement-up-rera/111851611