New Developer Cannot Deny Homebuyer Rights Merely Because Payments Were Made to Previous Promoter: Karnataka RERA

Case Title: Vijaya Shanthi Kanuru v. Manyam Estates Private Limited & Ors.
Complaint No.: 00202/2025
Authority: Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA)
Citation: 2026 LLBiz RERA (KA) 108

The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA) has directed Sohan Realty, the developer that took over a Bengaluru residential project subsequently known as Sohan Skypark, to recognise Vijaya Shanthi Kanuru as the lawful allottee of Flat No. B-302 and provide her access and possession of the apartment.

Dispute Over Flat Allotment

The complaint arose from the allotment of Flat No. B-302 in the residential project. The allottee had made payments in connection with the flat to the project's earlier promoter, Manyam Estates Private Limited.

Following the subsequent takeover of the project by Sohan Realty, a dispute arose concerning the allottee's rights and whether the new promoter could refuse to recognise the payments and contractual rights arising from the earlier arrangement.

New Promoter Bound to Honour Existing Allottee Rights

K-RERA held that the subsequent promoter could not simply shift responsibility to the outgoing developer after taking over the project.

The Authority relied upon Section 8 of the RERA Act, which deals with the obligations of a promoter where a project is transferred or taken over, and Section 11(4)(a), which requires a promoter to honour the obligations arising from agreements and representations made to allottees.

The Authority observed:

“Once M/s Sohan Realty has stepped in as promoter under Section 8, it cannot refuse access nor shift responsibility onto the outgoing promoter.”

Right to Possession and Peaceful Enjoyment

K-RERA also relied upon Section 19(1) of the RERA Act, which recognises an allottee's right to possession and peaceful enjoyment of the apartment in accordance with the terms of the agreement.

The Authority held that the change in the identity of the promoter could not, by itself, extinguish the rights already acquired by the allottee.

Accordingly, the subsequent developer was required to recognise Kanuru's allotment and provide her access to the apartment.

Takeover of Project Does Not Extinguish Existing Rights

The ruling emphasises that a promoter taking over an existing real-estate project also assumes statutory responsibilities towards its existing allottees.

The incoming developer cannot avoid those obligations merely by contending that payments were made to the previous promoter. Any dispute concerning financial or contractual liabilities between the outgoing and incoming developers cannot, by itself, be used to defeat the allottee's established rights in the project.

K-RERA Directs Recognition of Allotment

K-RERA accordingly directed Sohan Realty to recognise Vijaya Shanthi Kanuru as the lawful allottee of Flat No. B-302 and to grant her access and possession of the apartment.

The decision reinforces the statutory protection available to homebuyers when a real-estate project changes hands during its development.

Key Takeaway

The decision underscores that a change in promoter does not automatically wipe out the rights of existing allottees. When a new promoter steps into the project, it must comply with the obligations imposed by RERA towards the existing homebuyers.

For allottees, the ruling reinforces the principle that their contractual and statutory rights travel with the project, rather than depending solely upon the identity of the developer who originally received their payments.

Gujarat RERA Unveils SOP for Completion of Stalled Real Estate Projects - GujRERA/Order- 115 dated 23.07.2026

 

Gujarat RERA Unveils SOP for Completion of Stalled Real Estate Projects

The Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority (GujRERA) has introduced a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) vide GujRERA/Order- 115 dated 23.07.2026 for intervention and completion of stalled or stressed real estate projects, laying down a structured mechanism for completing projects where the original promoter is unable or unwilling to do so.

The framework, issued under Sections 8 and 37 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, is aimed at protecting homebuyers while ensuring that unfinished projects can be revived through a transparent and time-bound process.

Under the new framework, GujRERA can consider intervention in projects whose registration has lapsed, has been revoked, or which have otherwise been identified as stalled or stressed. The authority may take into account factors such as prolonged suspension of construction, the promoter's financial or legal inability to complete the project and a substantial number of complaints from allottees.

Allottee associations get first right of refusal

One of the key provisions of the SOP is that the Association of Allottees will have the first right of refusal to undertake completion of the remaining development work. Other options include the landowner, a mortgagee bank or financial institution, or another developer or promoter.

An allottee association may coordinate with GujRERA, submit a completion proposal, or undertake the remaining work either directly or through contractors, project management consultants or a new developer.

The authority may also invite other developers through an Expression of Interest process. Their financial strength, technical capability, previous project record and RERA compliance history will be among the factors considered.

Two-thirds consent required for completion proposal

The SOP requires a proposed completion plan to be supported by the consent of at least two-thirds of the project's allottees. Where an allottee association submits the proposal, the relevant general-body or governing-board resolution will also be required.

The framework's prescribed consent declaration also provides for the substitution or appointment of a new promoter and the transfer or assignment of rights, obligations and responsibilities necessary for completing the project.

Financial viability to determine revival model

GujRERA's SOP places considerable emphasis on the financial and technical feasibility of stalled projects. Completion proposals will have to set out the source and utilisation of funds, the balance cost of construction, outstanding lender liabilities, construction milestones and any additional amount that may be required from allottees.

The authority's feasibility assessment will also examine the physical stage of construction, structural condition, remaining development work, funds collected from buyers, the balance in the RERA separate account, outstanding receivables, lender and statutory liabilities, land title, encumbrances, approvals and pending litigation.

Promoters face restrictions after lapse or revocation

Once a project's registration lapses or is revoked, the promoter will no longer be permitted to advertise, market, book or sell units in the project. Withdrawals from the project's RERA separate account are also to be frozen pending further directions from the authority.

The original promoter will also be required to provide updated information on allottees, audited project finances, unsold inventory and encumbrances, including outstanding project loans.

GujRERA to oversee new completion entity

After examining proposals and consulting the appropriate government and competent authorities, GujRERA will determine the most appropriate model for completing the project. Factors will include the proposed entity's capability, the physical status of the project, technical feasibility, financial viability and the interests of allottees and other stakeholders.

Once a completion model is approved, the authority can hand over the project to the selected entity for the limited purpose of carrying out the remaining development work.

The new entity will remain subject to RERA compliance, while GujRERA can review progress at intervals of no more than six months. Failure to adhere to the approved completion schedule or financial plan could lead to further action under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act.

The new SOP therefore establishes a formal route for stalled projects to move from regulatory intervention to financial and technical assessment, selection of a completion entity and monitored revival, with the stated objective of safeguarding allottees and facilitating completion of unfinished developments.

Gujarat RERA moves to initiate proceedings under Section 8 of RERA Act over stalled WTC GIFT City project

 

Gujarat RERA Moves Toward Section 8 Intervention in WTC GIFT City Projects

The Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority (GujRERA) has issued a public notice GujRERA/Regulatory/WTC Tower-A, B & D/10318/2026 dated 21.09.2026 proposing proceedings under Section 8 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act in connection with the stalled WTC GIFT Tower A, B & D project at GIFT City, Gandhinagar.

The two public notices, issued in August and September 2026 respectively, involve the same promoter, WTC Noida Development Company Private Limited, and cite prolonged delays in construction, complaints from allottees and concerns relating to the promoter and the projects.

Tower C: 311 of 312 units booked, construction only 28%

In its public notice dated August 17, 2026, GujRERA said the registered completion date for WTC GIFT Tower C had expired on June 30, 2025. The project had originally been scheduled for completion on June 30, 2024, followed by an extension declared by the promoter.

According to the notice, the promoter had not completed construction or submitted the required project-end compliance report. A quarterly progress report submitted in April 2024 indicated that only around 28% of Tower C had been constructed.

The project comprises 312 units, of which 311 had been booked, leaving only one unit shown as pending booking.

GujRERA also stated that several complaints had been received, principally concerning completion of construction and delivery of possession. The authority further referred to alleged financial irregularities and said it had earlier written to Axis Bank for monitoring withdrawals from the project's RERA bank account.

The notice also records investigations by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and the Directorate of Enforcement concerning the promoter.

Tower C faces lease and development-rights complications

The Tower C notice further states that the GIFT Authority cancelled the lease agreement with the promoter on June 4, 2025. According to the notice, the promoter therefore did not possess development rights over the project site until any further order.

The notice also refers to proceedings before the Delhi High Court concerning use of the “WTC” trademark.

A majority of Tower C allottees have formed the Gandhinagar Gift City (Tower-C Members) Housing and Commercial Co-operative Service Society Ltd. The authority said allottees had sought regulatory intervention so that construction could resume and possession could eventually be handed over.

Towers A, B & D: 1,168 of 1,188 units booked

A second public notice, dated September 21, 2026, concerns WTC GIFT Towers A, B & D.

The project originally had a completion date of June 30, 2023, which was later revised to June 30, 2024. The promoter subsequently submitted an incomplete application seeking another extension, but the application could not be approved because of deficiencies.

The notice says the project remained incomplete after the revised deadline and that the promoter had not filed the project-end compliance report.

The project contains 1,188 units, of which 1,168 had been booked, leaving 20 units shown as pending booking.

The authority noted that Part Occupation Certificates had already been issued for Towers A and D in June 2020, while structural work on Tower B had been completed. A promoter-submitted progress report from April 2024 showed approximately 79% construction completion for Tower B.

Earlier RERA order and lack of compliance cited

For Towers A, B & D, GujRERA said it had passed a common order on March 24, 2026, primarily directing the promoter to complete the project.

The latest notice states that no action appeared to have been initiated by the promoter to comply with those directions and that no appeal had been filed against the order before the appellate tribunal.

The notice also refers to investigations by the SFIO and Directorate of Enforcement and records the cancellation of the promoter's lease agreement by the GIFT Authority in June 2025.

Allottee association formed for Tower B

The notice states that a majority of the allottees of Tower B had formed The Trade Centre (Tower-B) Co-Op Housing and Commercial Society Limited, registered in May 2026.

According to the notice, allottees had approached the authority seeking intervention after waiting for possession for a prolonged period.

RERA accounts frozen, fresh bookings stopped

In both cases, GujRERA has taken immediate regulatory measures while considering Section 8 proceedings.

The authority has ordered the respective RERA bank accounts to be frozen, prohibited the promoter from accepting fresh bookings and revoked the promoter's access to the Gujarat RERA portal.

The promoter has also been directed to provide documents including an updated allottee list, latest audited project financial statements, details of unsold inventory and information on encumbrances, project loans and outstanding liabilities.

Section 8 process could determine how projects are completed

The notices are significant because they move the two WTC projects toward the regulatory mechanism under Section 8 of RERA, which permits the authority, in circumstances covered by the Act, to arrange for remaining development work through an appropriate mechanism.

The notices do not themselves announce appointment of a new developer or final takeover of the projects. Instead, GujRERA is inviting objections and claims before taking a final decision.

For WTC GIFT Towers A, B & D, objections and claims were invited until November 2, 2026. The Tower C notice provides a 30-day period from publication of the notice.

The combined action indicates that the authority is moving beyond simply recording construction delays and is examining a structured intervention aimed at completing the remaining work and addressing the interests of hundreds of existing allottees.

For the two projects together, the notices record 1,479 booked units out of 1,500 total units — 311 of 312 in Tower C and 1,168 of 1,188 in Towers A, B & D — underscoring the scale of the allottee interest involved.

RERA Review Powers Are Limited; Review Cannot Be Used to Rehear a Matter on Merits: MP REAT

RERA Review Powers Are Limited; Review Cannot Be Used to Rehear a Matter on Merits: MP REAT

Title: Madhya Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority v. Aarti Soni & Anr.

The Madhya Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MP REAT) recently dismissed a review petition filed by the Madhya Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, reiterating that the power of review is limited and cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal.

The Tribunal held that review is maintainable only where there is an error apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new material/evidence, or another sufficient reason. A party cannot seek a rehearing of the matter merely because it is dissatisfied with the earlier appellate decision.

The Authority contended that subsequent action taken under Section 59 of RERA, including imposition of a ₹1 lakh fine, demonstrated compliance with the earlier directions. The Tribunal, however, found that the subsequent penalty did not establish effective compliance with the earlier order and that the requirements arising under Sections 7 and 8 of RERA continued to remain unfulfilled.

Accordingly, the Tribunal found no ground for review, dismissed the review petition and directed the Authority to proceed with compliance after affording the concerned parties an opportunity of hearing.

Key takeaway: A review petition under RERA cannot be used to reopen the merits of a reasoned appellate order. Subsequent regulatory action will not, by itself, establish an error in the original decision or cure continuing non-compliance with statutory directions. 

Once registration of the Real Estate project lapses on non-completion of project or on revocation,the Authority is enjoined upon the duty to consult with the appropriate Government to take such action as it may deem including the carrying out of the remaining development works by competent authority or by the association of allottees or any other manner

 In the Matter of  Bikram Chatterji vs Union Of India Complaint no. WRIT PETITION (C) NO.940/2017 decided on  23.07.2019 before Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court Observed that

112. Once registration lapses on non-completion of project within the time stipulated or it is revoked the consequence ensue as enumerated in Section 8 of RERA, the Authority is enjoined upon the duty to consult with the appropriate Government to take such action as it may deem including the carrying out of the remaining development works by competent authority or by the association of allottees or any other manner as may be determined by the Authority. The development work has to be completed and cannot be left in between. Section 8 reads thus;

“8. Obligation of Authority consequent upon lapse of or on revocation of registration.- Upon lapse of the registration or on revocation of the registration under this Act, the Authority, may consult the appropriate Government to take such action as it may deem fit including the carrying out of the remaining development works by competent authority or by the association of allottees or in any other manner, as may be determined by the Authority:

Provided that no direction, decision or order of the Authority under this section shall take effect until the expiry of the period of appeal provided under the provisions of this Act:

Provided further that in case of revocation of registration of a project under this Act, the association of allottees shall have the first right of refusal for carrying out of the remaining development works.”

MahaRERA directed the Complainant to form the association of allottees and initiate the revocation under section 7 of RERA, The Respondent Builder to provide the Allottee Data to the Complainants.

 In the Matter of Parkaj Vrailal Mehta & others Vs. Shree Adiraj Laxmi Builders Pvt. Ltd Complaint no.CC006000000012158 decided on 11.09.2019  before Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority

MahaRERA through its order dated 11th September 2019 directed promoter ―Shree Adiraj Laxmi Builders Pvt. Ltd‖ (Maha RERA Reg. No. P51700013358)

to enable the allottees to form an association of allottees (AOA) so the decision for initiating section 7 i.e. revocation of the project may be taken by them.

 Allottees of the project ―Adiraj Crystal‖ situated at Ambernath, Thane filed various complaints stating that the Respondent has failed to execute and register the agreements for sale, complete the Project and hand over possession. During the proceeding of the case it was found/declared that the project registration has lapsed. Further, the construction work of the project could not be completed because of reasons which were beyond the promoter‘s control. 

Authority directed the Respondent to handover the list of allottees of the said project, along with their contact details, to the Complainants within 30 days from the date of this Order, to enable the allottees to take an informed decision Pertaining to the said project and if the association of allottees may like to Proceed for revocation under Section 7/8 of the Act. 

The Respondent may seek the approval of the association of allottees for order under Section7(3)

In the similar Matter of Milind Dhande & others Vs. Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd. Complaint no.CC006000000055794 decided on 06.08.2019 before Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority

MahaRERA ordered the Respondent to handover the list of allottees of the project ―Whispering Towers EFG Wings‖ to Association of allottees so that decision regarding revocation of registration under Section 7 of the RERA Act can be taken by them. 

Facts 

1. The Complainants have booked apartments in the project 'Whispering Towers EFG Wings' situated at Kurla, Mumbai via registered agreements for sale. The Complainants have alleged that the date of possession as stipulated by the said agreements has already been lapsed. Therefore, they prayed that since the Respondent has failed to hand over the possession of the apartments within the stipulated period, they be directed to pay interest, on delay or refund the amounts paid as per the provisions of section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. 

2. The Authorized representative for the Respondent explained that the construction work of the project could not be completed because of reasons which were beyond the Respondent's control. Specifically, he submitted that the due to financial constraints and unpaid dues of the Planning Authority and various Banks, which has extended project loans, the project has got stalled. 

3. In Complaint no. CC006000000056289, the Respondent had submitted that he is in advanced talks with another promoter/ financer and commits to revive and restart the project by April, 2019 and complete the project with occupation certificate by December 30, 2020. 

4. Since the Respondent has failed to revive the project by April, 2019 as committed, the association of Allottees may be proceeded with revocation of registration of the project under Section 7 of the RERA Act. 

5. In view of the above facts, the Respondent is directed to handover the list of Allottees of the said project, with contact details, to the Complainants within 30 days from the date of this Order, to enable the Allottees to take a decision pertaining to the said project and whether the association of Allottees may like to proceed with revocation of registration under Section 7 of the Act or not. 

6. The Respondent may seek the approval of the association of allottees for order under Section 7(3) of the said Act, as per MahaRERA Order no 7/ 2019 dated February 8, 2019 on Revocation of Registration of Project for reviving and completing the said project.

An unregistered project shall be considered at par with the project of which the registration has been cancelled otherwise the protection to association of allottees under section 8 will not be available to allottees

 In the Matter of Sabiha and Ors vs Anil Jindal, SRS Real Infrastructure Complaint no.14 of 2019 decided on 30.07.2019 before Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority Panchkula

• It was held by the Authority that allottees of the project have formed an association (RWA in brief) and got it registered under the Haryana Registration and Regulation of Societies Act, 2012. 

• RWA has estimated that an amount of about Rs. 6.5 crore has to be incurred to complete the project. The association having fulfilled all the tasks assigned to it by the Authority has a right to take over the project for completing it themselves and respondents were restrained for creating any third party interest in the project. 

• The project was unregistered as promoters failed to register the complaint and violated the mandate of section 3 of the Act and section 7 was applicable which deals with revocation.

•  The Authority in its order held that when a promoter fails to register the  project despite clearly being aware that he should do so, such projects must be treated at par with the projects of which the registration is cancelled by the Authority. 

• Not taking this view will create an anomalous situation and would adversely jeopardize the interest of the allottees of the project of which the promoters are deliberately refusing to finish the project. 

• Not taking such a view would also amount to saying that the protection of Section 8 is not available to the Allottees of an unregistered project. In the considered view or this Authority an unregistered project shall be considered at par with the project of which the registration has been cancelled. Having said so, now the protection of Section 8 must be granted to the allottees of the present project of the respondent.

x