According to the TNRERA circular dated August 10, 2026, the relief applies to registered projects whose original, revised or previously extended completion date falls on or after February 28, 2026.

Eligible developers do not have to submit a separate extension application or pay an extension fee.

Why has TNRERA granted this extension?

The Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs issued an advisory on July 31, 2026, asking State RERA authorities to consider four months of relief for affected projects.

This followed an Office Memorandum issued by the Union Finance Ministry on April 29, 2026. It treated the prevailing West Asia situation as a “war” for invoking force majeure where related disruptions affected contractual work.

Section 6 of the RERA Act allows a project’s registration to be extended when events such as war affect its regular development.

Which projects are eligible?

All registered projects with an official completion date on or after February 28, 2026, receive an automatic four-month extension. This extra time applies whether the project is on its original deadline, a revised timeline, or an already extended schedule. The relief is granted universally to eligible projects without developers needing to submit individual applications or pay extra fees.

For example, if a project’s recognised completion date was August 31, 2026, it may now move to December 31, 2026.

Projects with a completion date before February 28, 2026, do not appear to qualify under the stated condition.

S. Ramprabhu, chairman of the DTCP Committee at the Builders Association of India, urged the Tamil Nadu government to reduce delays in TNRERA project registrations and introduce a faster, more efficient approval process.

Does your possession date also change automatically?

Not necessarily.

A homebuyer must check two different dates:

1. The possession date written in the Agreement for Sale
2. The revised completion date recorded by TNRERA

The circular clearly gives the project four more months under TNRERA. But it should not automatically be treated as changing every possession promise made to buyers.

If the sale agreement contains a valid force-majeure clause covering war, the developer may rely on it. However, the extension should not be used to hide delays caused by poor planning, lack of funds, slow construction or problems that existed before the West Asia conflict.

Buyers may still have rights to seek interest, compensation or refund under Section 18 of RERA, depending on their agreement and the actual cause of delay.

Homebuyers question the blanket relief

The Forum for People’s Collective Efforts(FPCE)  has strongly criticised the national advisory.

FPCE president Abhay Upadhyay questioned why a conflict outside India was being used to give a blanket extension when no project-by-project proof of material shortages had been demanded.

The organisation fears that this could create a precedent under which builders cite future international conflicts to seek repeated extensions.

FPCE also pointed out that developers normally choose their own completion timelines, often allowing several years to finish a project. It argued that these timelines should already include a reasonable cushion for temporary supply problems and commercial risks.

Builders get relief—but what about buyers?

This is the most serious concern.

A buyer may have planned to leave a rented house, conduct a housewarming or arrange school admissions based on the promised possession date. A four-month delay could mean four more months of:

• House rent
• Home-loan EMI or pre-EMI
• Storage and moving expenses
• Financial and personal uncertainty

However, the circular does not provide automatic financial relief to affected buyers. Those seeking delay interest, compensation or refund may still have to approach TNRERA or another appropriate legal forum individually.

Check Project Details Using the Verified.RealEstate

Homebuyers can use the Verified.RealEstate RERA Search Tool to quickly find the available registration details of a project. Keep the project’s exact RERA registration number ready and follow these steps:

• Open the Verified.RealEstate RERA Search Tool.
• Scroll down and below the Quick RERA Search, enter the complete RERA registration number without changing its format in the search bar.
• Click the search or submit button.
• Select the correct project and click on the RERA number from the displayed result.
• You can now view the details, including
  • the project name,
  • promoter,
  • registered address,
  • registration date,
  • project documents
  • completion deadline and
  • current status.
• Compare the displayed completion date with the date in the original RERA certificate and the possession date promised in the Agreement for Sale.
• If the builder claims an extension, check whether a revised completion date or extension record is available.

Always confirm that the project name and promoter match your documents, as entering an incorrect or incomplete RERA number may produce the wrong result or no result.

Buyers who need further support can contact Verified.RealEstate for offline assistance. The team can communicate with the promoter and relevant authorities to collect available project details, verify the revised completion timeline and help buyers understand how the extension affects their booking.

The bottom line

TNRERA’s circular gives eligible projects four additional months of regulatory time. But it does not automatically erase every earlier delay or cancel all homebuyer rights.

Buyers should not rely only on a builder’s announcement. They must compare the revised TNRERA deadline with the possession date promised in their Agreement for Sale before accepting that the delay is legally protected.

A recent Punjab RERA case has become an important reminder for apartment buyers who sign builder-buyer agreements without fully understanding the difference between carpet area and super area.

The case was filed by homebuyers Megha Chowdhri and Varun Kumar Sharma, who had booked a penthouse in Omaxe’s “The Lake” project in New Chandigarh. The buyers claimed that the builder delayed the handover of possession and also charged them on the basis of super area instead of carpet area.

According to the case details, the apartment had a super area of 2,570 sq. ft. and a carpet area of 1,498 sq. ft. The buyers argued that they were wrongly charged on the larger super area and sought a refund of around ₹75.84 lakh. They also claimed interest for delayed possession, as possession was due by July 31, 2023.

Punjab RERA partly accepted the buyers’ complaint. It granted relief for the delayed possession, but rejected the refund claim relating to the super area charges.

What Punjab RERA Found

Punjab RERA examined the Builder- Buyer agreement (BBA) signed between the parties. The Authority found that the agreement had already mentioned the pricing structure, the area details and the total sale consideration.

The total sale consideration was recorded as ₹1,85,26,170 excluding GST, and the apartment buyer agreement was executed on January 4, 2023. The builder argued that the concept of super area and the corresponding pricing had already been disclosed in the agreement signed by the buyers.

This is the uncomfortable but practical lesson from the case: if the buyer signs an agreement where the pricing basis is clearly stated, it becomes difficult to challenge that pricing later unless the clause itself violates the law or the prescribed RERA format.

RERA’s Judgment and Explanation

Punjab RERA rejected the buyers’ claim for refund of the alleged super area charges. The Authority held that all agreed terms between the buyer and builder are binding unless they are contrary to law or the prescribed agreement format.

The Judges referred to the two important legal principles: Caveat Emptor and Pacta Sunt Servanda.

Caveat Emptor means “buyer beware,” which places responsibility on the buyer to carefully read and understand the agreement before signing.

Pacta Sunt Servanda means that valid agreements must be honoured by the parties who signed them.

At the same time, Punjab RERA made one important clarification: a builder cannot ¹unilaterally charge homebuyers for an increase in carpet area or super area unless such charges are expressly agreed in the buyer agreement.

The Verdict

⚖️First, the buyers did not get refund of the super area-based amount because the area, price and sale consideration had already been mentioned in the agreement. They could not later seek refund of the same agreed charges, unless those terms were shown to be illegal or contrary to RERA.

⚖️Second, the builder was still held liable for delayed possession. Since possession was due by July 31, 2023, the delay claim was partly honoured, and the builder was directed to compensate the buyers for the possession delay.

In simple terms, Punjab RERA said:
You cannot ask for refund of a charge you contractually agreed to, but the builder cannot escape liability for delayed possession.

Carpet Area vs Super Area: What Buyers Must Understand

➡️Carpet area is the actual usable space inside the apartment, including rooms, kitchen, bathrooms, internal passages and internal partition walls. Under RERA, it excludes external walls, service shafts, exclusive balcony/verandah and open terrace areas.

➡️Super area or super built-up area is a larger figure that usually includes the carpet area plus a proportionate share of common spaces such as lift lobby, staircase, corridors, clubhouse and amenities. This is why super area is always higher than carpet area.

For buyers, the key point is simple: carpet area tells you the real usable space, while super area includes shared/common portions also.

What Is the Actual Rule?

Under RERA, the key legally recognised area is carpet area. Builders must clearly disclose the carpet area of the apartment. The purpose of RERA was to remove confusion caused by vague terms like super area, saleable area and built-up area.

A builder should not mislead buyers by highlighting only the super area while hiding the carpet area.

However, the Punjab RERA case shows a practical point: if the agreement clearly mentions the super area, rate, carpet area and total sale consideration, and the buyer signs it, the buyer may not automatically get refund later just because the pricing was based on super area.

So the rule is not simply “super area is always illegal.” The better understanding is this:

✅ Builders cannot secretly or unilaterally impose super area charges later.

✅ Builders cannot change area-based charges without contractual backing.

✅ Builders must disclose carpet area clearly.

✅ Buyers must carefully check whether the price is being calculated on carpet area, super area or another basis.

If the pricing basis is clearly written and accepted in the agreement, it may become binding unless it violates RERA or the prescribed agreement format.

Buyer Beware: Do Not Sign First and Question Later

This case is a strong warning for homebuyers.

Many buyers check the location, amenities, elevation, sample flat and payment plan, but they do not read the builder-buyer agreement line by line. That is where the risk begins.

Before signing, buyers should clearly check 🔍:

• Whether the price is calculated on carpet area or super area.

• Whether the carpet area and super area are both mentioned.

• Whether the loading factor is clear.
• Whether balcony, terrace, parking, clubhouse, maintenance and other charges are separately mentioned.
• Whether the possession date is clearly written.
• Whether delay compensation is mentioned.
• Whether the agreement matches the RERA registration details.
• Whether the builder can revise area or cost later.

Once the agreement is signed, the buyer’s ability to challenge agreed pricing terms becomes much weaker. Real estate disputes are often not lost because the buyer had no rights, but because the buyer signed without understanding what the agreement actually said.

Review the Agreement Before You Sign

The Punjab RERA case makes one thing clear: brochures, sales promises and WhatsApp messages will not matter as much as the signed agreement.

Before paying a major amount, buyers should check the RERA details, carpet area, super area, payment schedule, possession date, delay clause, parking charges, maintenance charges and area variation terms.

Verified.RealEstate can help buyers review builder-buyer agreements with professional lawyers, verify project documents and identify hidden clauses before they commit. In real estate, one unchecked clause can change the entire cost of the property.

1. Unilaterally means doing something by one party alone, without the other party’s consent or agreement.
   
   ↩︎

This article explains why developers ask for 80% upfront, when such a demand is legally valid, and what buyers can do if the demand violates RERA.

Why Some Developers Ask for 80% Advance Payment Before Registration

Despite clear restrictions under RERA, some developers still demand up to 80% of the flat cost at early stages mainly to improve cash flow and fund ongoing construction without relying heavily on bank loans. Collecting large sums upfront reduces interest burden and provides greater financial flexibility.

Another key reason is the delay of sale agreement registration, which involves stamp duty, registration charges, and the fixing of legally binding possession timelines. By postponing registration, developers retain more control over project schedules and reduce immediate statutory obligations.

Market conditions also play a role. In high-demand projects, buyers often fear losing a unit or missing future price appreciation. This urgency—combined with limited awareness of RERA provisions—leads many buyers to comply.

However, commercial convenience or market pressure cannot override the law. Without a registered Agreement for Sale, demanding 80% advance payment remains a violation of RERA, regardless of construction progress or buyer consent.

When a Developer CAN Legally Demand 80% Payment

A developer is legally entitled to demand up to 80% of the flat price only when all the following conditions are met simultaneously. Missing even one condition makes the demand illegal. The important thing is Getting the sale agreement registered.

1️⃣ Registered Agreement for Sale Is Already Executed

• The Agreement for Sale must be signed and registered under the Registration Act.
• Before registration, a developer cannot collect more than 10% of the total consideration.

👉 If there is no registered agreement, any demand for 80% is illegal.

2️⃣ The Payment Schedule in the Agreement Allows It

• The registered agreement must clearly specify a construction-linked payment plan, such as:
  • Completion of plinth
  • Completion of slab / structural framework
  • Brickwork, plastering, and finishing stages

Only when the cumulative milestones genuinely add up to 80% can such a demand be raised.

3️⃣ Construction Has Actually Reached That Stage

• Payment demands must match actual on-ground construction progress, not projections or promises.
• If construction is only 30–40% complete, demanding 80% is a violation—even if an agreement exists.

👉 Buyers are entitled to ask for:

• Engineer’s certificate
• Architect’s certificate
• Chartered Accountant (CA) certificate

These certifications are mandatory under RERA for milestone-based payment demands.

4️⃣ Demand Is Raised Through a Formal Demand Notice

• The demand must be documented through:
  • Email
  • Official letter
  • Builder portal / system-generated notice
• It must clearly reference the specific construction milestone achieved.

When Demanding 80% Is Illegal

A developer cannot demand 80% if:

❌ The Agreement for Sale is not registered
❌ The buyer has paid only a booking amount or token
❌ Construction has not reached the relevant milestone
❌ The demand is made orally or informally
❌ The agreement is one-sided or violates RERA norms

In all these situations, the demand violates Section 13 of RERA.

Common Tricks Buyers Should Watch Out For

• “Pay 80% now, registration later”
• “This is only an advance, not sale consideration”
• “Everyone in the project is paying like this”
• “Registration will be done at possession”

👉 None of these override RERA. Law always prevails over builder practice.

What a Buyer Can Do If 80% Is Demanded Wrongly

If a developer raises an unlawful demand, a buyer can:

• Refuse payment until legal conditions are met
• Send a written objection citing Section 13 of RERA
• File a RERA complaint seeking:
  • Declaration that the demand is illegal
  • Refund of excess amount (if already paid)
  • Interest and penalty against the developer

RERA authorities across India have consistently ruled in favour of buyers in such cases.

One-Line Takeaway

A developer can demand 80% of the flat price only after a registered Agreement for Sale and only when construction-linked milestones genuinely justify that amount. Anything else is a RERA violation.

Role of a Channel Partner in Protecting Buyers

As a channel partner, Verified.RealEstate acts as an independent buyer-support intermediary, helping homebuyers navigate transactions safely and legally. This includes verifying RERA registration, checking whether the Agreement for Sale is properly registered, flagging illegal advance payment demands, and guiding buyers before releasing high-value instalments. By focusing on compliance, documentation clarity, and risk prevention, a channel partner helps buyers make informed decisions rather than pushing sales at any cost.

RERA was created to protect homebuyers, regulate developers, and bring transparency to the real estate sector. But over time, confusion grew around what kinds of disputes RERA could actually decide. A recent Bombay High Court judgment (2025) has now given the clearest boundary: RERA cannot decide title disputes, grant declarations, or issue injunctions between allottees. At the same time, the Court reaffirmed earlier principles laid down in the landmark Neelkamal Realtors (2017) case, which established RERA’s constitutionality and regulatory strength. Together, these rulings provide a complete picture of what RERA can and cannot do.

The 2025 Dispute: Competing Claims Over the Same Flat

The controversy arose from a Navi Mumbai project where two different buyers claimed rights over the same apartment:

• Sana Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd. had a registered sale deed from 2016.
• Another set of purchasers bought the same flat through a 2017 agreement for sale and even took possession in 2019.

Sana later secured a favourable order from the RERA Appellate Tribunal. The second set of buyers filed a civil suit seeking declarations of their rights, cancellation of the earlier deed, and injunctions. Sana argued that Section 79 of RERA bars civil suits and therefore only RERA should handle the conflict.

This brought the issue to the Bombay High Court:
Can RERA decide ownership, title, and declaration-based disputes between multiple buyers?

Bombay High Court’s 2025 Verdict: RERA Is Not a Civil Court

The Court issued a clear, authoritative ruling that resets expectations about RERA’s role.

Key Clarifications from the 2025 Judgment

• RERA cannot adjudicate title disputes between two allottees.
• RERA cannot grant civil court remedies, including:
  • Declarations of ownership
  • Cancellation of sale deeds
  • Injunctions over possession
• Section 79 mentions that civil courts can hear a case if the remedy asked for is something RERA has no power to give.
• RERA’s ability to execute its orders like a civil court decree does not make it a civil court.
• Disputes involving proprietary rights, competing agreements, or double sales must be decided exclusively in civil courts.

This ensures that RERA stays focused on its intended role: regulating promoter behaviour, ensuring delivery, and protecting allottees within the framework of the Act—not resolving civil title conflicts.

Foundational Precedent: Bombay High Court’s 2017 Neelkamal Realtors Verdict

The 2025 ruling rests on principles first articulated in the milestone case Neelkamal Realtors & Ors. vs. Union of India (2017). This judgment upheld the entire RERA framework and clarified the nature of its powers. It remains the backbone of RERA jurisprudence in India.

Key Points from the 2017 Neelkamal Realtors Judgment

• RERA is fully constitutional and does not *infringe the rights of promoters.
• All ongoing projects at the time RERA came into force must comply with its provisions.
• Developers must adhere to updated timelines and obligations, even if the delay occurred before RERA.
• The Act is built on consumer protection, and its strict mechanisms are justified.
• The 70% escrow requirement for safeguarding buyer funds is valid and essential.
• RERA authorities can impose interest, penalties, compensation, and compliance orders.
• RERA functions as a specialised regulator, not as a substitute for civil courts.
• The judgment upheld RERA’s role in industry transparency, accountability, and fairness.

This 2017 decision laid the constitutional foundation, while the 2025 verdict clarifies jurisdictional boundaries.

*Infringe - to violate or break a rule, right, or law.

What RERA Can Do: Strong Consumer and Regulatory Powers

Despite limitations on civil remedies, RERA retains wide, enforceable powers to regulate the industry and protect homebuyers.

RERA’s Core Powers Include:

• Ordering refunds, interest, compensation, and possession
• Enforcing compliance with agreement for sale obligations
• Monitoring project timelines and auditing finances
• Penalising promoters and real estate agents
• Ensuring proper use of escrow funds
• Protecting buyers from misrepresentation, delays, and unfair charges

RERA is a fast, efficient remedy for project-linked grievances—but not for ownership or title disputes.

Choosing the Right Forum: RERA vs Civil Court

The combined effect of the 2017 and 2025 judgments gives a simple rule:

Use RERA for:

• Delay in possession
• Non-refund or wrongful demand
• Misleading advertisements
• Defective construction
• Non-registration of the project
• Breach of agreement obligations

Use Civil Court for:

• Title disputes
• Double-sale conflicts
• Cancellation or validity of sale deeds
• Declaratory reliefs
• Injunctions
• Questions of ownership or possession rights

This guarantees both speed and legal correctness.

Conclusion: A Clear Division of Powers for Greater Clarity and Accountability

The Bombay High Court’s rulings from 2017 and 2025 work together to define RERA’s true jurisdiction.
RERA is a powerful regulator but not a civil court.
It enforces promoter obligations, protects buyers, and ensures project discipline—but disputes over who owns what must go to civil courts.

This clarity strengthens the real estate dispute-resolution system and ensures that buyers and developers approach the correct forum from the very beginning.