Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.Abdul Hakhim
Shwas Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Premchand Surendran – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
M.A.Abdul Hakhim, J.
1. The respondents 1 to 4 in Complaint No.37/2023 of the Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority (the K-RERA) are the appellants in the Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development Act, 2006 (the RERA). The respondent is the complainant in the said complaint.
2. The parties are referred to according to their status before the K-RERA.
3. The complainant is an allottee in the Villa Project by name ‘Epcot County’ launched by the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent is a private limited company engaged in the business of development and construction of real estate projects. The respondents 2 to 4 are its Directors. The 4th respondent is the landowner of the Project also. The 5th respondent is another private limited company, which is a sister concern of the 1st respondent.
4. The complainant filed the complaint claiming amounts under various heads from the respondents alleging various defects, deficiency and delay from the part of the respondents with respect to the real estate
The court affirmed that ongoing real estate projects must be registered under RERA to protect allottee interests, regardless of title transfer.
The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act mandates registration for ongoing projects, where completion certificates are absent, emphasizing consumer protection in real estate transactions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the retrospective or retroactive operation of RERA, 2016, and the mandatory registration requirement for ongoing projects with completion certifica....
Complaints under RERA can only be filed for projects capable of registration; lack of necessary permissions renders a project unregistrable, barring complaints.
Section 35 deals with powers of authority to call for information and conduct investigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the exemption from registration under RERA and the applicability of RERA provisions to unregistered real estate projects.
The court clarified that the Completion Certificate's issuance date is crucial in determining a project's ongoing status under RERA, emphasizing the conjunctive reading of statutory provisions.
The Act, 2016 is retroactive in operation, and the court clarified the requirements for project registration, the validity of completion certificates, and the procedure for imposing penalties.
The existence and date of issuance of occupancy certificates are critical in determining whether a real estate project is ongoing under the RERA.
Non-compliance with regulatory requirements justifies classification as an 'ongoing project' under applicable law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article