BENGALURU, India – July 1, 2025 – Years after its inception, the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act (RERA) in Karnataka, intended as a beacon of hope for homebuyers, appears to be struggling with its core mandate. Despite obtaining favorable rulings from the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA), frustrated homeowners find themselves caught in a bureaucratic labyrinth, pursuing what they believe is rightful compensation from developers who are reportedly sidestepping recovery orders.
Recent information obtained through a Right to Information (RTI) request, valid up to May 15, 2025, paints a concerning picture. K-RERA has issued 656 revenue recovery certificates (RRCs) against prominent developers and promoters across 565 separate cases, commanding a total of ₹366.20 crore. Yet, the actual funds recouped are strikingly low: a mere ₹18.70 crore has been collected from just 62 cases. This leaves a staggering ₹347.44 crore in penalties outstanding from the remaining 594 unresolved matters.
A particularly stark illustration of this challenge involves only ten major developers, who collectively owe an eye-watering ₹347 crore in penalties to homebuyers, with no payments reportedly made to date.
Homebuyer advocates are voicing strong dissatisfaction, suggesting that K-RERA has shown insufficient zeal in pursuing these substantial outstanding sums. Homebuyers frequently lament that the authority seems to be deflecting responsibility by deferring to revenue officers for enforcement.
Under Section 63 of the RERA Act, non-compliance with authority orders should trigger daily penalties on builders, potentially escalating to 5% of the housing project’s estimated cost. However, K-RERA has been notably unsuccessful in effectively implementing this vital provision.
“Even with court-backed decisions in their favor, many homebuyers are still in the dark regarding the actual mechanisms for enforcement,” commented one activist. “If the RERA authorities themselves lack the power or will to enforce their own directives, forcing buyers into civil courts is simply not a practical recourse for the average person.” This ongoing predicament highlights a significant chasm between the regulatory framework’s intent and its practical application, leaving thousands of homebuyers in a protracted and stressful legal holding pattern.
