Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Role of Chairperson of RERA Authority in Granting Registration - The Chairperson is responsible for overseeing the registration process but does not act alone; the authority's functions are carried out collectively by the designated members or officials. The Chairperson's role is to facilitate and supervise, but the actual decision-making regarding registration involves the entire authority or designated adjudicating bodies ["Imperia Structures Ltd. VS Anil Patni - Supreme Court"].
Authority’s Power to Grant Registration - The RERA Authority, including the Chairperson, is empowered to grant or reject registration applications after due process, which includes hearing the applicant and examining relevant documents. The authority's functions are clearly defined under Sections 4, 5, and 6, emphasizing that registration is a collective statutory function, not solely the Chairperson's prerogative ["Imperia Structures Ltd. VS Anil Patni - Supreme Court"], ["Nilesh Suresh Kene & Ors. Vs Ashok Durga Pillay & Ors - 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 78"].
Process and Criteria for Registration - Registration is mandated for ongoing projects unless specific exemptions apply, such as the receipt of a Completion Certificate before the commencement of RERA, which can exempt a project from registration under Section 3(2)(b) ["P. V. NIDHISH S/O. P. V. CHANDRAN VS SIVAPRAKASH S/O KRISHNAN - Kerala"], ["P. V. Nidhish, S/o. P. V. Chandran VS Sivaprakash, S/o. Krishnan - Kerala"]. The authority assesses whether a project is ongoing or completed based on facts like project status and certificates issued, not solely on the Chairperson’s individual decision ["Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682"].
Exemptions and Special Cases - The receipt of a Completion Certificate prior to RERA’s commencement can exempt a project from registration, but this is determined by the authority's collective assessment, not by the Chairperson alone ["P. V. NIDHISH S/O. P. V. CHANDRAN VS SIVAPRAKASH S/O KRISHNAN - Kerala"], ["P. V. Nidhish, S/o. P. V. Chandran VS Sivaprakash, S/o. Krishnan - Kerala"]. The authority also considers whether the project is phased or ongoing, with each phase potentially requiring separate registration ["Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682"].
Legal and Procedural Safeguards - The authority’s decision-making process involves hearings, opportunities for the promoter to be heard, and adherence to procedural rules. The authority cannot bypass its statutory procedures or act suo motu without following due process, which includes the collective decision of the designated members or officials ["Shwas Homes Private Ltd. VS Moon Waters Owners Association - Kerala"], ["Wadhwa Group Housing Private Ltd. VS Vijay Choksi - Bombay"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The Chairperson of the RERA Authority does not have the sole power to grant registration independently. Instead, the authority’s functions, including granting or rejecting registration, are collective statutory responsibilities involving multiple members or designated officials. The Chairperson supervises and facilitates this process but cannot unilaterally decide on registration without the collective authority's approval ["Imperia Structures Ltd. VS Anil Patni - Supreme Court"]. Therefore, registration is a collective decision-making process, not an act of the Chairperson alone.
In the complex world of real estate development in India, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) plays a pivotal role in ensuring transparency and accountability. Developers must navigate stringent registration requirements before launching projects, but a key question often arises: whether Chairperson of the RERA Authority alone can grant registration to the project? This issue touches on the balance between efficiency and procedural fairness, especially as projects face delays due to regulatory hurdles.
This blog post delves into the legal nuances, drawing from court judgments and RERA provisions. While we provide general insights, note that this is not legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for specific cases.
Section 3 of the RERA Act mandates prior registration of real estate projects with the Regulatory Authority, unless exempted (e.g., completed projects with occupancy certificates before May 1, 2017). K.V Subha W/o Late C.P Sivaraj Vs Kannur Heights Apartments Owners Association - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 290 For instance, courts have ruled that an Occupancy Certificate issued before the Act's enforcement is conclusive, exempting projects from registration. K.V Subha W/o Late C.P Sivaraj Vs Kannur Heights Apartments Owners Association - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 290 Similarly, projects lacking necessary permissions may not be registrable, barring complaints under RERA. Mohammed Zain Khan VS Emnoy Properties India - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 1089
Registration applications under Sections 3 and 4 are typically submitted by promoters, defined under Section 2(zk), excluding mere landowners unless specified. POOJA CONSTRUCTIONS VS SECRETARY KERALA URANMA DEVASWOM BOARD - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 889 The aforesaid statutory provisions make it abundantly clear that the Application for registration of the Real Estate Project under Sections 3 and 4 of the RERA is to be submitted by the Promoter/s alone who do not include the land owner. POOJA CONSTRUCTIONS VS SECRETARY KERALA URANMA DEVASWOM BOARD - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 889
No direct precedent explicitly states that the RERA Chairperson can unilaterally grant project registration. However, RERA authorities, including the Chairperson, hold delegated powers to enforce registration, subject to procedural compliance. IFCI Infrastructure Development Limited VS Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 212Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682
The Act vests broad powers in the Authority under Section 81, allowing delegation. Courts have upheld directions for registration by bodies like K-RERA, implying collective or delegated exercise of authority. IFCI Infrastructure Development Limited VS Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 212
Section 3 mandates registration, while Section 81 empowers the Authority to delegate functions. In one case, the court upheld K-RERA's direction for registration, emphasizing the body's enforcement role. IFCI Infrastructure Development Limited VS Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 212 This suggests the Chairperson, as head, may act within this framework.
Even 'No Profit No Loss' organizations must register ongoing projects and face compensation liabilities. Army Welfare Housing Organisation(AWHO) vs Nagarajan Vasudeva Rao - 2025 Supreme(Mad) 4583 On inspection, it was found that the project is only partly completed and therefore the project comes under the definition of 'Ongoing Project' and thereby authority vide letter dated 13.12.2017 issued direction for registration. Army Welfare Housing Organisation(AWHO) vs Nagarajan Vasudeva Rao - 2025 Supreme(Mad) 4583
Crucially, delegation to single members is valid. Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682 K-RERA's delegation under Section 81 must adhere to natural justice, allowing efficient decision-making. Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682
A significant ruling clarifies that a single member can exercise adjudicatory functions. The complaint filed by the aggrieved person under Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 is, thus, can be adjudicated by the Authority, comprising of three members including its Chairperson. A Single Member of the Authority cannot constitute it so as to discharge the adjudicatory functions... However, regulations permit benches or single-member disposal for speedy redressal, not conflicting with Section 21's composition for body corporate status. Psa Impex Pvt. Ltd. VS Satbir Singh - 2021 Supreme(All) 176 The court held that the decision of the Authority to delegate and the regulations framed by it to create benches for early disposal of the complaints, can not be said to be inconsistent with the Act. Psa Impex Pvt. Ltd. VS Satbir Singh - 2021 Supreme(All) 176
This implies the Chairperson could approve registrations via delegated powers, depending on state-specific rules.
Section 21 outlines the Authority's composition (Chairperson + at least two members), but does not bar individual exercise through delegation. Psa Impex Pvt. Ltd. VS Satbir Singh - 2021 Supreme(All) 176 Absent explicit limits, the Chairperson may handle approvals per internal setups, but typically within collective or delegated bounds.
Courts focus on the Authority's overall power rather than isolating the Chairperson. For exemptions, projects under Section 3(2)(a) or (b) are outside RERA if completed pre-Act. Yogesh Keshav Bele VS Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 1354Devinarayan Housing & Property Developments Private Limited, Represented by Managing Director, Chennai VS Manu Karan - 2023 Supreme(Mad) 3046
No case directly voids a Chairperson's solo registration grant, but emphasis remains on due process.
Non-compliance risks penalties, including under Section 59. Mohammed Zain Khan VS Emnoy Properties India - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 1089
Buyers should confirm registration status via RERA websites before investing.
While not explicitly authorized to act alone, the RERA Chairperson may grant project registration through valid delegation under Section 81, as supported by judicial interpretations. Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682Psa Impex Pvt. Ltd. VS Satbir Singh - 2021 Supreme(All) 176 Courts prioritize procedural adherence over rigid individualism.
Key Takeaways:- Registration is mandatory for eligible ongoing projects. IFCI Infrastructure Development Limited VS Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 212- Delegation enables single-member efficiency. Psa Impex Pvt. Ltd. VS Satbir Singh - 2021 Supreme(All) 176- Always follow natural justice and state rules.
RERA aims to protect stakeholders—stay informed to avoid pitfalls. For tailored advice, engage a real estate lawyer.
References:1. IFCI Infrastructure Development Limited VS Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 212: Validity of K-RERA registration directions.2. Shwas Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Premchand Surendran - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1682: Delegation to single members.3. Psa Impex Pvt. Ltd. VS Satbir Singh - 2021 Supreme(All) 176: Single-member jurisdiction upheld.4. Others as cited for context on exemptions and promoters.
#RERA #RealEstateLaw #ProjectRegistration
Is the receipt of the Completion Certificate by Promoter before commencement of RERA alone is sufficient to avoid registration of the Real Estate Project under Section 3 of the RERA? 2. ... by the original authority namely, the K-RERA. ... Section 3 (2) (b) of RERA, provides that no registration of the real estate project shall be required where the promoter has received the Completion Certificate for the real esta....
Is the receipt of the Completion Certificate by Promoter before commencement of RERA alone is sufficient to avoid registration of the Real Estate Project under Section 3 of the RERA? 2. ... by the original authority namely, the K-RERA. ... Section 3 (2) (b) of RERA, provides that no registration of the real estate project shall be required where the promoter has received the Completion Certificate for the real esta....
Thus, it is clear that the word, 'promoter' referred to in Section 11 deals with the discharge of duties, which the promoter has to do, for grant of registration of a real estate project, which has been referred to in Section 5 of the RERA. ... The learned counsel further submitted that, the appellants are not entitled to avail exemption from registration under RERA Act, for, in terms of Section 3(2)(a) of the RERA Act, for grant of exemption, the la....
Prior registration of real estate project with Real Estate Regulatory Authority. ... The RERA therefore does not contemplate registration of a project, for which no development permission is granted by Planning Authority. 20. ... The issue that therefore arises for consideration is whether in respect of unregistered project, an allottee can merely give 'source information' to MahaRERA for taking action under section 3 of the #HL_STA....
The aforesaid statutory provisions make it abundantly clear that the Application for registration of the Real Estate Project under Sections 3 and 4 of the RERA is to be submitted by the Promoter/s alone who do not include the land owner. ... (iii) Whether the landowners are also liable to be treated as a co-promoter for the purpose of registration of real estate projects under Section 3 of the RERA? 2. ... The appellant produced various documents obtained in the name....
Whether order dated 28.04.2021 preclude K-RERA from reconsidering the question of registration of the project in the final stage? 2. ... (e) Whether an inquiry under section 35 is mandatory before considering and adjudicating the question as to whether a project is ongoing or not for the purpose of registration? ... Whether there is any illegality in initiating suo moto proceedings by K-RERA regarding the #HL_STAR....
Section 3 of the RERA Act is extracted herein: " Section 3 - Prior registration of Real Estate project with Real Estate Regulatory Authority. ... On inspection, it was found that the project is only partly completed and therefore the project comes under the definition of "Ongoing Project" and thereby authority vide letter dated 13.12.2017 issued direction for registration. 11.
all or some of the plots in the said project, whether with or without structures thereon; or (iii) any development authority or any other public body in respect of allottees of- (a) buildings or apartments, as the case may be, constructed by such authority ... That post RERA registration, name of the Appellant was required to be reflected in the registration under the statutory provisions. ... Respondent alone. ... The project ‘Th....
(2)(b), the project does not require registration and same would not be governed by the RERA Act. ... Section 4 to 8 provides for application for registration of real estate projects, grant of registration and revocation of registration. Sections 9 and 10 deals with registration and functions of real estate agents. Section 11 deals with functions and duties of promoter. ... The Appellant complainant also alleged that the said project#HL_END....
Whether Phase-I is an independent phase and whether a separate society can be formed for such a phase and the common facilities, which are located in Phase-I are exclusively for Phase-I alone or are they for the use of other phases also, is a factual issue, which has to be examined by the authority before ... The issue, therefore, is as to whether the promoter/developer only can initiate the process of registration of the society and that too for the entire project ....
2017 or that the project was completed before the said date. This Court held that the question whether the project is an ongoing one or not arises only in the absence of Occupancy Certificate. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant, if the Occupancy Certificate is issued before 01.05.2017, the K-RERA cannot go behind the Occupancy Certificate to consider the legality of the Occupancy Certificate. If the Occupancy Certificate is not issued before 01.05. 14. The first question to be considered is whether Ext.B1 Occupancy Certificate is a conditional one or not. It is i....
2017 or that the project was completed before the said date. This Court held that the question whether the project is an ongoing one or not arises only in the absence of Occupancy Certificate. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant, if the Occupancy Certificate is issued before 01.05.2017, the K-RERA cannot go behind the Occupancy Certificate to consider the legality of the Occupancy Certificate. If the Occupancy Certificate is not issued before 01.05. 2017, still the promoter can prove before the K-RERA that the project was completed before 01.05.2017 to t....
The complaint filed by the aggrieved person under Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 is, thus, can be adjudicated by the Authority, comprising of three members including its Chairperson. The constitution/composition of the Authority is provided under Section 21 of the RERA Act, 2016 which states that the Authority shall consists of a Chairperson and not less than two whole-time Members to be appointed by the appropriate Government. A Single Member of the Authority cannot constitute it so as to discharge the adjudicatory functions of the Authority or to exercise the powers und....
The RERA registration number allotted to the project by UPRERA is UPRERAPRJG9224. LDA and RERA are different statutory authorities having different jurisdiction and following different approval processes LDA is responsible for approving the building plans under UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 and UPRERA is an authority for registration of projects under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Accordingly, their approvals are different and issued separately thus having different numbers. (Referred to in Para 6 (c) of the Plaint Exhibit E-PW-3 at P....
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
