The Supreme Court has directed developers to deposit either full compensation and interest imposed by the regulatory body or at least 30 per cent of the penalty as a pre-condition to challenging any RERA order.

Supreme Court ruling binding builders to pay before challenging RERA order a welcome move

Developers now may have to think twice before challenging Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) orders as the Supreme Court has directed that developers should either deposit full compensation and interest imposed by the regulatory body or at least 30 per cent of the penalty before they can challenge the order before the appellate authority. Professionals practising in MahaRERA welcomed the SC decision and said the order has hit the nail on the head by ensuring that flat owners get justice and do not fall prey to the delaying tactics often adopted by the builders by challenging such orders.

CA Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman of MahaSEWA (Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association), said, “This is a landmark and welcome decision passed by the Supreme Court. Now the promoters will think many times before the appeal is filed. Now they may decide to file the appeal if they are sure of winning. Appeals by promoters will come down drastically. The judgement has put all the doubts to rest. Even the appellate tribunal will not be able to proceed to admit the appeals of the promoter unless 100 per cent of the amount is deposited.”

“However, if the allottees are aggrieved against the order of authority or adjudication officer, the appeal may be filed without depositing any amount. This also becomes a great deterrent to the promoters to file the appeal. Therefore, now we find most of the promoters try to settle the dispute out of court as soon as complaints are filed,” Prabhu said.

Solicitor Stuti Galiya said, “It is a well known fact that builder lobbies have abundant legal and financial resources and they often create separate legal budgets for each project. Hence, it is seen that most of the time, developers/builders do not take the legal action against them seriously, as they believe that they could easily get through by stretching the matter in various forums for years and years. This often results in justice being denied to flat owners as they often are not able to fight such a long legal battle, for financial and time constraints. This judgement has hit the nail on the head by ensuring that flat owners get justice and do not fall prey to the delaying tactics. This is certainly a positive and welcome move in the right direction.”

Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who practises in MahaRERA, said, “The Supreme Court judgement only endorses section 40(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 that the amount invested by the allottees, which is often their life savings, along with the interest thereon as quantified by the regulatory authority or the adjudicating officer, can be recovered as arrears of land revenue by them from the builders. However, the practical difficulty faced by the flat buyers is the laborious process in attaching the properties of the developer.”

Advocate Vinod Sampat, founder president of Flat Users Residents Welfare Association, said, “The said judgement is a big boost to flat purchasers. Builders who delay construction or the project for one reason or other will have to refund the principal amount and interest to defaulted flat buyers. It is common knowledge that delaying tactics are adopted by both builders and as well as their advocates. The approach of the court to insist on the deposit before accepting an appeal is a welcome move.”

The case

Newtech Promoters and Developers Private Limited v State of Uttar Pradesh and others is a case where the flat buyer filed a complaint against the developer for non-compliance of possession of flat within the stipulated time period, as per the agreement. The complainant had booked a flat by paying a consideration of Rs 28.21 lakh on October 4, 2012, and the possession, as per the agreement, was to be given by 2015. However, when the developer failed, the buyer moved the complaint demanding refund of Rs 28.21 lakh with interest.

The state RERA authority found the complainant’s claims to be true and accordingly on April 5, 2019 passed an order directing the developer to refund the principal amount of Rs 28.21 lakh along with interest of Rs 19.82 lakh. The developer, instead of executing the RERA order, moved a writ petition challenging the same including the recovery certificate dated September 8, 2020 holding it to be without jurisdiction as it has been passed by a single member of RERA. The developer claimed the single member had no jurisdiction to pass such an order. However, the SC set aside the developer’s plea and passed the landmark verdict.

Source: https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/supreme-court-ruling-binding-builders-to-pay-before-challenging-rera-order-a-welcome-move-23208089

As more and more cases are filed with MahaRERA, it is not sufficiently equipped to deal with them with only two functional benches; experts say need of the hour is to appoint additional benches, delegate powers.

Pendency with MahaRERA will go up if additional benches not appointed

While the number of pending cases before MahaRERA is piling up with every passing day with more than 5,404 cases, the delay in getting hearing dates has not only irked the litigants but also the professionals practising at MahaRERA, as their demand to fill vacancies and increase the benches in MahaRERA has fallen into deaf ears. Legal brains say, if this continues, the purpose of setting up RERA to provide speedy disposal of complaints within 60 days of filing complaints is defeated.

Moreover, even with such a huge voluminous pendency of cases before MahaRERA, only two benches are functional as on date, increasing the workload on the system.

mid-day had, in its article titled ‘Wait for MahaRERA hearing dates keep getting longer’ on December 29, highlighted the concern of thousands of litigants about their plight regarding the long wait.

Speaking to mid-day, CA Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman of Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association (MahaSEWA), said, “Considering the pending complaints, the first date of the hearing is received after nine months to one year. In the first hearing, the parties are asked if they want to explore amicable settlement through a conciliation forum. If parties do not opt for regular hearings, the date for hearing comes after six to nine months. The subsequent dates are also given after nine months. Thus, the very purpose of setting up RERA to provide speedy disposal of complaints within 60 days is defeated.”

Prabhu added, “Complaints against registered projects filed till date (since formation of MahaRERA in mid-2017) is 15,593, and 10,189 orders have been passed so far. Pending complaints stand at 5,404. Complaints filed against unregistered projects are 839 of which 784 are disposed of, thus the number of pending complaints against unregistered projects is 55. Pendency is increasing with each day. However, with the vast leap in hearings from six months to nine months, instead of the mandated 60 days as per RERA act, pending complaints may go up to 10,000 in the next six months, which is worrisome. The need of the hour is to immediately appoint three additional benches and additional manpower for clearing these cases.”

Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who practises at MahaRERA, said, “Litigants who filed cases about a year ago are now being given dates from May to August 2022 in some of the cases handled by me, which may be the situation with other advocates as well. As such, additional members are required to be filled in to expedite the mechanism for complaint disposal ideally within 2 months from date of filing the complaint. Moreover, MahaRERA charges a fee of R5,000 per case towards filing charges, whereas other states charge a mere Rs 1,000.”

“The RERA authority was among the early few quasi judicial authorities to adapt to online hearings post the onset of the pandemic. However, the pandemic and other factors have resulted in increased defaults in the real estate industry, leading to breaches of agreements and non-delivery of the terms of sale deeds. There would, therefore, be an enhanced load on RERA. Thus, there would be an urgent need to increase the number of benches to cope with the increased load of matters” said Floyd Gracias, Supreme Court counsel.

Anil D’Souza, secretary, MahaRERA Bar Association, said, “Like all new ventures, MahaRERA is growing and will continue to grow. Hence, it needs more benches for adjudication. Since every second day, we see a MahaRERA order in the newsprint, more and more cases are now getting registered under the authority. At the same time, there is a huge stream of existing ongoing cases at various stages in the litigation process.”

“With the growing number of new cases and also the ongoing pending matters, it is imperative that there are more benches for adjudication that can reach out and address the hopefuls. Hence, a concerted effort to holistically address every stage, from court hearings to the final execution of the MahaRERA order is the need of the hour,” said D’Souza.

According to Prabhu, there are a few ways to move forward. First, MahaRERA and the state government have to increase the number of members/ benches in MahaRERA who can handle the complaints and assist in clearance of pendency. Second, the Supreme Court, in Newtech Promoters and Developers vs UP state and others, upheld the powers of RERA under section 81 of RERA to delegate its powers of complaints redressal to its members or any other person. Thus, RERA may appoint additional retired civil court judges or retired IAS officers to hear the complaints. Third, timely disposal of complaints is most important as the allottees have invested their life savings and are also paying EMI on housing loans. Any delay in deciding the complaints indirectly put the allottees to greater disadvantages etc.

Advocate Vinod Sampat, founder-president of Cooperative Societies Residents Users and Welfare Association, said, “The law stipulates that as far as possible RERA should pronounce the verdict within 90 days. This implies that a hearing should take place, all the parties should be heard and the matter must be normally disposed of within 90 days.”

He added, “As anticipated by many professionals practising in RERA, it is an open secret that dates are given after more than 90 days. The reason for the same is more work pressure and less helping hands due to staff crunch. COVID-19 lockdown also contributed to increased pendency of cases. During the first hearing, officials request the parties to go for conciliation of the matter and get the matter amicably resolved. I fail to understand why one should wait for a long time to give a date. Right now, a circular should be issued that all new matters should first go for conciliation and an attempt should be made by eminent and selfless bodies like Consumer Protection Division to get the matter resolved amicably. Presuming one is not successful with that, the matter would go on.”

He added, “If one looks at the number of cases being filed and the number of the officers attending the matters, we can clearly see that RERA benches are insufficient to cope up with the said work load. This will result in pendency of matters for years together. This requires it to be resolved in the most efficient manner.”

When asked what could be the solution, he said, “The solution is framing broad guidelines and issuing circulars. If the parties are well aware that this is the intention of RERA and if it is spelt out through circulars then people would be reluctant to delay the matter. We all know that builders use all possible tricks to delay the matter as the financial resources of the flat purchasers are limited. Moreover, the builder has got nothing to lose. These days, the nine per cent interest that may be awarded by RERA is peanuts. The need of the day is that RERA criminally prosecute defaulting builders. Unfortunately, the builders’ lobby is not taking RERA orders seriously. We all know that even the order once passed is difficult to implement due to bureaucratic constraints.”

Source: https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/pendency-with-maharera-will-go-up-if-additional-benches-not-appointed-23207216

The Registration Department here is asking details of RERA registration to record documents of apartments, villas, and layouts.

Registration under RERA must

The Registration Department here is asking details of (Real Estate Regulatory Authority) RERA registration to record documents of apartments, villas, and layouts.

“We got the government communication on Monday and it has come into effect immediately. However, we do not ask for RERA registration for second sales as RERA is only for the promoters,” an official said.

The Registration Department asks for approval from the Directorate of Town and Country Planning or the authority concerned and now it has included RERA registration, the official said.

According to a document writer here, the Department is not registering documents if the RERA registration is not there. This order has come without any prior announcement and hence affecting consumers as they were not prepared for it. Now, they need to postpone registrations and wait for the RERA registration.

K. Kathirmathiyon, secretary of Coimbatore Consumer Cause, said according to the instructions given by the Department, “Where the area of land proposed to be developed exceeds 500 sq.mt. or the number of apartments proposed to be developed exceeds eight, inclusive of all phases, registration with RERA is mandatory for registration of the documents.”

This instruction was implemented all of a sudden, without any prior information or notification to the public. Registration of documents can be refused only if notified u/s 22A of Registration Act – as documents opposed to public policy and registration of unapproved sites is specifically banned under Section 22A of the Act. But, there is no provision in the Registration Act for mandatory RERA Registration.

Mr. Kathirmathiyon said if the total land developed exceeded 500 sq. mt (5,380 sq.ft), registration under RERA was mandatory. It meant all layouts needed to be registered, since 5,380 sq. ft meant normally more than just two sites. When the sites in approved layout were purchased, it was a one-time transaction between the promoter and the buyer. Hence, there should not be a need to ask for RERA registration. And, to regularise unapproved sites, the government had the regularisation scheme, he pointed out.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Coimbatore/registration-under-rera-must/article38030162.ece

The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority has appointed Delhi-based consultancy company, REPL as third party consultant to monitor physical and financial progress of three stuck projects in Greater Noida.

UP-RERA appoints REPL to monitor construction of three stuck projects in Greater Noida

The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP-RERA) has appointed Delhi-based consultancy company, REPL (Rudrabhishek Enterprises Ltd.) as third party consultant to monitor physical and financial progress of three stuck projects in Greater Noida.

These projects were stuck and construction was resumed after the intervention of UP RERA who brought developers and homebuyers together to complete the project.

These include Casa Grande 2 of Earthcon Construction Pvt. Ltd; La Palacia of Newtech La Palacial Pvt Ltd; and Unibera Towers of Unibera Developers Pvt Ltd. Total number of units in these projects are 1925 and the estimated cost of completion will be approximately Rs 225.11 crore.

“Many projects are feasible but were stuck due to lack of funding. In some cases, both promoter and buyers approached us for solution. We have restarted construction of such project by forming a monitoring committee,” said Rajive Kumar, Chairman of UP RERA.

REPL will monitor the construction of remaining development work and report to authority as per overall project implementation plan.

“REPL has extensive experience of providing consultancy in real estate sector including its complete project life-cycle. We have similar assignments running on projects of various other developers by providing technical consultancy and PMC assistance,” said CMD of REPL, Pradeep Misra.

REPL will work with all the stakeholders, including the authority and flat owner associations.

“Our priority is to develop and implement proper monitoring & supervision mechanism for time-bound completion of remaining construction works on these projects,” Misra said.

According to Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Associations of India (CREDAI), around 190,000 units amounting to a valuation of Rs 1 lakhcrore are stuck in Noida, Greater Noida and Ghaziabad.

In Greater Noida alone, at least 36 realty projects are facing insolvency proceedings.

This has impacted around 50,000 home buyers and blocked about Rs 7,000 crore worth of authority dues.

“REPL will review the tendering process, physical performance, and timelines. REPL will also review the fund utilization, and construction quality. Timely delivery of the assignment will bring relief for many people who were worried about their committed investments. We have already started mobilizing special teams on the project and expect to see the things rolling out on ground very soon,” said Satish Sehta (VP- Building Services, REPL).

REPL has been working as consultants for Real Estate projects across the country, including large scale residential townships, group housing, Hi-tech cities and commercial complexes. It is also involved in multiple smart cities, urban infrastructure, planning, GIS, metro, highways and water supply schemes. From UP RERA, it has deployed on similar projects of other builders which have got held-up in middle due to various reasons.

Source: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/property-/-cstruction/up-rera-appoints-repl-to-monitor-construction-of-three-stuck-projects-in-greater-noida/articleshow/88388977.cms

Thousands of homebuyers have been left in the lurch as they wait for compensation from defaulting builders for several months and revenue officials dither on recovery.

Demand for dedicated Karnataka-Rera secretary grows as compensation cases pile up

Thousands of homebuyers have been left in the lurch as they wait for compensation from defaulting builders for several months and revenue officials dither on recovery.

Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-Rera) listed 120 apartment projects whose promoters have failed to deliver flats within the agreed date. It asked deputy commissioners of respective districts to recover a cumulative amount of Rs 238 crore from builders and pay consumers. However, only around Rs 6.8 crore has been recovered since April and only 14 out of 5,800 consumers were fortunate enough to receive compensation.

The sorry state of affairs is being attributed to the absence of a dedicated secretary to K-Rera among other reasons.

The government had posted K Nagendra Prasad as K-Rera secretary in April after transferring KS Latha Kumari. But this is a concurrent charge given to Nagendra Prasad, who is director of the horticulture department. According to officials, enforcement of Rera rules is taking a hit because of this. “K-Rera needs a full-time secretary considering the workload and the nature of service that entitles protection of consumer interest. We have written to the government to post a dedicated secretary and response is awaited,” said K-Rera chairman HC Kishore Chandra.

“We have made some internal arrangements to ensure routine works are not hampered. While regulation issues demand dedicated attention, we are managing it with some extra working hours,” said Nagendra Prasad.

Monitoring apartment projects to see whether developers are complying with the rules and ensuring defaulters pay compensation to homebuyers demands regular field work and perpetual interaction with revenue officials. The stakeholders, including civil society organisations, argue that Rera rules cannot be effectively implemented without the presence of a full-time secretary at the real estate watchdog.

According to Rera rules, a developer who fails to deliver a flat within the deadline declared in the agreement of sale has to pay compensation — the amount decided by K-Rera adjudicating officer, and 8.5% interest on the amount paid by the customer for the delayed period. The recovery from developers is done by the revenue department and it can even attach the property in question following orders of the adjudicating officer.

In Bengaluru Urban district alone, about 600 recovery cases are pending. “A long process is involved in recovering compensation money from defaulting developers and it takes more time if it is a case for attachment. We are at it,” said Bengaluru Urban DC J Manjunath.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/demand-for-dedicated-k-rera-secretary-grows-as-compensation-cases-pile-up/articleshow/88232086.cms

The Karnataka government has told the Supreme Court that it has already adopted the model model-builder and agent-buyer agreements prescribed by the Central government to all states.

Realty agreements prescribed by Centre under RERA adopted, Karnataka tells Supreme Court

The Karnataka government has told the Supreme Court that it has already adopted the model model-builder and agent-buyer agreements prescribed by the Central government to all states. It said the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) (Agreement for Sale) Rules, 2020 were notified on June 12, 2020.

Responding to the top court’s notice, the state government claimed the contention that none of the states had framed model agent-buyer agreement was incorrect and contrary to facts.

It asked the top court to dismiss a PIL filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in this regard for not being maintainable, either in law or facts.

The petitioner had sought a direction for framing the “model-builder agreement” and agent-buyer agreement in the real estate sector to infuse transparency and fairness, restraining builders and agents from indulging in unfair and restrictive trade practices.

The government said it issued circulars on October 30, 2021, and November 12, 2021, issuing directions to all deputy commissioners to comply with the orders passed by the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority within the prescribed period.

Earlier, the Centre said a robust regulatory mechanism and draft ‘agreement for sale’ already existed under provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, to balance the rights and interest of homebuyers and promoters in an accountable and transparent manner.

The Centre further said it had shared the draft ‘agreement for sale’ in 2016, after the enactment of the RERA, with all states and Union Territories. “Currently, all States and UTs have notified rules under RERA except Nagaland with which the answering respondent is in discussion,” it said.

The Centre said it has discharged the duty by formulation of the act and delegating the rulemaking upon the states for better implementation of the provisions of RERA.

Source: https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/realty-agreements-prescribed-by-centre-under-rera-adopted-karnataka-tells-supreme-court-1057946.html

Four and a half years since RERA Act came into force, Maharashtra continues to lead the country in terms of projects registered.

RERA has brought discipline to real estate sector but needs more teeth, say experts

Four and a half years since Real Estate Regulatory and Development Act came into force, Maharashtra continues to lead the country in terms of projects registered. Experts, though, say that the Act, which has brought about discipline into the real estate sector, needs more teeth and manpower to plug its loopholes.

Analysis by Anarock — a real estate consultancy firm – showed that across the country, 71,307 projects have been registered with the regulator. Maharashtra has reported the highest registration with 31,664 projects, followed by Gujarat (9,272) and Karnataka (4,497), respectively.

In terms of grievance redressal of homebuyers, as many as 78,903 cases have been disposed so far by various state and Union Territory (UT) regulatory authorities. Uttar Pradesh and Haryana have disposed the highest number of cases, accounting for an approximately 61% share of total disposed cases. “UP saw 30,990 cases disposed, and Haryana nearly 16,864 cases, as per the latest progress report released by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs,” the report read.

All states, except Nagaland, the report said, notified rules under Rera act; the northeastern state is in the process of doing so.

As many as 30 states and UTs have set up their Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) of which Jammu & Kashmir, Ladakh, Meghalaya, Sikkim and West Bengal have notified their rules but are yet to establish their authorities. Besides, 28 states have set up Appellate Tribunals with Arunachal Pradesh, J&K, Ladakh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Sikkim and West Bengal under the process of establishing the same.

On the loopholes in the law, Prakash Thakur, head of research team of Anarock, said manpower shortage is one of the major concerns for the authority. The Act specifies regular updating of sales report and project reports but that rarely happens, he said. Also, the authority does not have an efficient way to check the documents, which are uploaded on the website by the realtors, he added. Thakur said the mere regulatory nature of the authority does leave a gap in implementation of the orders of the RERA.

Both Thakur and Anuj Puri,chairman of Anarock Group, were quick to point out that the judiciary has stepped in to plug some of the loopholes that have been felt in the act. Recently, the Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 on all realty projects that were ongoing and had not received completion certificates until the law came into effect. This means that states that had diluted the provisions and did not include several under-construction projects under RERA’s ambit are now expected to do so.

As a result, we may see increased number of residential projects being completed in times to come,” said Puri. “Many developers with under-construction projects outside RERA had focused their resources on projects that did come under its ambit. This is no longer an option. The number of heavily delayed and even stalled units is likely to reduce. As per Anarock data, as of July 2021, nearly 6.29 lakh housing units launched in 2014 or before were incomplete or stalled across the top seven cities,” he added.

Source: https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/rera-has-brought-discipline-to-real-estate-sector-but-needs-more-teeth-say-experts-7648221/

The Delhi Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has initiated suo moto proceedings for ensuring strict compliance of the provisions of the RERA Act 2016 regarding prior registration of the projects.

Delhi Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Initiates Suo Moto Proceedings To Ensure Strict Compliance Of Registration Of Projects, Curb Cheating Of Buyers

The Delhi Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has initiated suo moto proceedings for ensuring strict compliance of the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 regarding prior registration of projects and also to curb incidents of developers cheating innocent buyers.

The proceedings were initiated yesterday by a coram comprising of Chairperson Justice Chander Shekhar and members Sheo Pratap Singh and Lorren Bamniyal.

The bench issued notice to Commissioners of all the Municipal Zones, Vice Chairman of the Delhi Development Authority, Chairperson of NDMC and the Commissioner of Police.

The development came after the Tribunal was apprised that there was a rampant non-compliance of the provisions of the RERA Act wherein large number of projects were not following the mandatory provision for prior registration of project.

For the said purpose, the Tribunal referred to Section 3 of the Act which talks about prior registration of real estate project with Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

The Tribunal also noted that the Registry had addressed couple of communications to the Commissioner of Police seeking details of the FIRs registered in respect of societies or individuals offering membership of housing projects and fraudulently collecting huge amounts of money from the gullible buyers in the city.

However, the Tribunal noted that the details were not received till date despite lapse of a considerable period of time and reminder.

Source: https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/delhi-real-estate-appellate-tribunal-suo-moto-project-registration-cheating-buyers-185778

A delay in the formation of a regulatory authority has affected the launch of real estate projects in Bengal.

Delay in RERA formation hits Bengal housing

A delay in the formation of a regulatory authority has affected the launch of real estate projects in Bengal. Developers have lost out on new business opportunities while aggrieved home buyers were left in the lurch because of the delay.

Six months have passed since May 4 when the Supreme Court had struck down a Bengal specific act to govern real estate activities in the state as ‘unconstitutional’, prompting the Mamata Banerjee-government to come up with new rules following the central model act.

The housing department had notified rules on July 26, which laid down the legal framework for setting up the Real Estate Regulatory Authority. However, it is yet to become functional for the want of a chairman and members.

More than 100 projects are yet to see the light of the day for want of registration by RERA, which is a must before builders can solicit buyers for new projects. Likewise, several hundred complaints filed by harassed homebuyers are also awaiting adjudication of the authority.

The vacuum in the regulatory authority comes at a time the Mamata Banerjee government announced a relief in the rate of stamp duty and the circle rate to stimulate demand in the real estate sector and encourage buyers.

In the absence of the authority, neither are the developers able to launch projects and take advantage of the buoyancy in the market nor are buyers getting enough projects to choose from.

“It is a fact that project launches are getting delayed as the authority has not been formed. We hope it is done soon,” Nandu Belani, president of Credai, Bengal, said.

The formation of the regulatory authority involves a well laid-down search process. The chairperson and other members of the authority are to be appointed by the state government on the recommendations of a selection committee consisting of the chief justice of the high court or his nominee, the housing secretary and the law secretary or their nominees.

Sources said the selection committee has been formed even though a change of secretary in the housing department may have slowed down the process, apart from the puja holidays.

The selection committee would be required to recommend candidates which the government is bound to pick from to fill up the post of chairperson.

Some of the developers, however, are not willing to wait for the formation of the authority and registration before launch to avoid cost overrun. Sushil Mohta, president of Credai West Bengal and owner of Merlin Group, said he has advised members to go ahead without registration, if required.

“Our project is fully compliant with the rules framed under the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Rules, 2021. Once the authority is formed, we will take registration,” Mohta said when asked about a new Merlin project.

Not all developers are confident though. One of them pointed out there is no legal provision to register ongoing projects in the rule promulgated in July. “Some of us may not want to expose our projects to legal challenges and put buyers into jeopardy,” said a city-based developer who did not wish to be named.

Source: https://www.telegraphindia.com/business/delay-in-rera-formation-hits-bengal-housing/cid/1838319

The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Rajasthan, has disposed of almost 89.83% of the complaints received by the customer this year.

Rajasthan RERA disposed of 90% complaints from home-buyers this year

The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Rajasthan, has disposed of almost 89.83 % of the complaints received by the customers this year.

This state is at the third position in the country to resolve the problems of the home-buyers. An official said, “The Rajasthan RERA received 1,484 complaints till Diwali, which were redressed by the authority.”

After the enactment and implementation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, over 1,750 projects have been registered under RERA across the state. An official said, “For consumer protection, the regulatory body has made quarterly reports online and transparency in the system is ensured. The prospective buyer can take a comparative decision on buying a property after analysing the quarterly report of projects.”

“After the system was introduced, many people got aware and complained if there was an irregularity. RERA duly heard the complaint and redressed it on time,” the official added.

As per the mandatory provision, the promoter has to upload updates on the RERA website for the project at the end of each quarter on apartments/flats, status updates of each building, floor, internal infrastructure, and common areas construction. Other details, including information on approvals, bank account details, revision in plans, licence issues, permits or approvals for the projects also have to be displayed in a public forum.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/state-rera-disposed-of-90-complaints-from-home-buyers-this-year/articleshow/87573457.cms