A residential development in Mysuru has come under renewed regulatory scrutiny after the state real estate regulator directed the project promoter to submit a time-bound compliance roadmap detailing unfinished works, missing approvals and statutory obligations. The move follows complaints from multiple apartment buyers who allege that core amenities and governance mechanisms remain incomplete years after possession and full payment.
The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority has sought a comprehensive status disclosure from the promoter of a multi-tower housing project in the city, asking for documentary evidence on what infrastructure and shared facilities have been completed and what remains pending. The regulator has also required a clear execution timeline, signalling that prolonged post-possession delays will no longer be treated as routine industry slippages. For homebuyers, the order highlights a recurring gap between possession and project completion in mid-sized city developments. While sale deeds have been registered and residents have moved in, buyers contend that the absence of statutory certificates, incomplete common amenities and the lack of a formal residents’ association have left them without effective control over maintenance, finances and common assets.
Real estate governance experts note that such disputes are increasingly common as projects launched in the previous decade reach their delivery stage. In many cases, construction milestones were met selectively to enable handover, while legal and community infrastructure obligations were deferred. The Mysuru case illustrates how regulatory oversight is now extending beyond physical construction to post-handover compliance. The authority’s direction requires the promoter to outline when remaining amenities will be delivered strictly in line with approved plans and commitments made at the time of sale. Failure to comply within the stipulated timeframe could trigger financial penalties under the Real Estate Regulation framework, underscoring the regulator’s intent to enforce accountability rather than issue advisory warnings.
From a market perspective, the intervention carries wider implications for developer credibility and buyer confidence in non-metro housing markets. Mysuru has seen steady residential growth driven by retirees, professionals and investors seeking affordability compared to Bengaluru. Regulatory uncertainty around project completion can directly affect resale values, rental demand and the city’s attractiveness as a stable housing market. Industry observers point out that the case also exposes structural gaps in how associations of apartment owners are formed and empowered. While legislation mandates the transfer of common areas, land rights and maintenance funds, inconsistent implementation has created friction between promoters, residents and local authorities. Until these mechanisms are standardised, regulators are likely to face repeated enforcement challenges.
The current order places the onus squarely on the promoter to demonstrate compliance rather than contest buyer claims. For residents, it offers a pathway towards clarity on timelines and legal status. For the sector, it reinforces a broader shift in regulatory posture where delivery is measured not just by possession, but by the full transfer of control, amenities and governance to homeowners.
