Thousands of homebuyers in Bengaluru who secured favourable orders from the state’s real estate regulator remain without refunds or possession, highlighting a widening enforcement gap within Karnataka’s housing oversight system. While rulings are being issued, recovery and compliance continue to stall leaving buyers in prolonged financial and legal uncertainty.
The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority, established under the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act 2016, was designed as a fast-track mechanism to protect purchasers and impose accountability on developers. Yet data reviewed by Urban Acres indicates that although more than 2,300 recovery orders have been passed since its formation in 2017, only a fraction have translated into actual monetary relief. A typical case illustrates the systemic bottleneck. A homebuyer who booked an apartment in North Bengaluru over a decade ago obtained an order directing refund with interest. However, execution required issuance of a Revenue Recovery Certificate and subsequent action by the district revenue authorities. The file, according to legal representatives, remained pending for months. Subsequent appeals and procedural challenges further delayed enforcement. Under the law, regulatory authorities can order refunds, interest or compensation if developers fail to deliver projects within agreed timelines. However, implementation depends on coordination between the regulator and the Revenue Department a process that experts say lacks strict timelines and monitoring.
Urban planners and housing policy analysts warn that the credibility of India’s real estate reform hinges not on the volume of orders passed, but on enforceability. “If enforcement mechanisms are weak, the deterrence value of the law diminishes,” said a senior property law practitioner. “Developers factor in delay as a cost rather than a penalty.” There are also concerns around regulatory transparency. Annual performance disclosures, mandated under statutory provisions, have not consistently entered the public domain, making independent performance evaluation difficult. Buyer associations argue that greater digital tracking of recovery certificates and stricter embargoes on non-compliant developers could strengthen outcomes. The enforcement lag has broader urban consequences. Delayed refunds trap household savings in stalled projects, reduce purchasing power and dampen trust in under-construction housing a segment crucial for meeting Bengaluru’s middle-income housing demand. In a city where land prices continue to rise, prolonged litigation cycles further exclude first-time buyers from formal housing markets. Industry representatives acknowledge that while regulatory oversight has improved disclosure standards and project registration discipline, dispute resolution timelines require institutional reform. Strengthening staffing, digitising inter-departmental coordination and publishing compliance dashboards are among the measures suggested.
For Bengaluru a city positioning itself as a global technology and investment hub reliable housing regulation is central to economic confidence. As project pipelines expand in peripheral growth corridors, the effectiveness of enforcement under the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act 2016 will determine whether regulatory reform delivers tangible protection or remains confined to paper orders.
Also Read: Bengaluru Nelamangala Sees Infrastructure Led Boom
Bengaluru Homebuyers Await RERA Relief
