Search This Blog

Translate the Site to your native language

Showing posts with label Take over of Project. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Take over of Project. Show all posts

Saturday, 26 September 2026

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

 

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.

Sunday, 16 May 2021

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