In a recent ruling, the Karnataka High Court delivered a scathing rebuke to the Kannamangala Gram Panchayat for its lax oversight, criticizing its decision to grant an occupancy certificate to a retirement home project without conducting essential inspections. The court’s intervention came in response to a petition filed by M/s Ozone Urban Infra Developers Pvt Ltd., challenging Karnataka RERA’s classification of their ‘Serene Urbana‘ project as an ongoing development.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, presiding over the case, declined to overturn Karnataka RERA’s decision, noting glaring deficiencies in the project’s amenities. Despite assurances of essential facilities like water and power supply, the apartment complex failed to deliver on its promises. The absence of amenities such as lifts and a sewage treatment plant further underscored the project’s inadequacies.
The court’s criticism extended to the authorities responsible for issuing occupancy certificates, cautioning against the issuance of such certificates without proper verification of amenities. To prevent similar oversights in the future, the bench issued a directive mandating thorough inspections before granting occupancy certificates. Officers handling these certificates will be held accountable for any lapses in inspection protocols.
Additionally, the court dismissed M/s Ozone Urban Infra Developers Pvt Ltd.’s petition, emphasizing the need for compliance with Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017. Rule 4 stipulates that promoters of ongoing projects lacking completion certificates must register with the Regulatory Authority.
Highlighting the financial implications for homebuyers, especially retirees, the court underscored the need for developers to adhere to regulatory standards. The issuance of occupancy certificates without proper inspections not only violates the law but also jeopardizes the investments and well-being of purchasers. The court’s decision to instruct developers to register with Karnataka RERA underscores the importance of regulatory compliance in the real estate sector.
The ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding the rights and interests of homebuyers, particularly vulnerable segments of society. As the case concluded, the court emphasized the imperative of providing retirees with safe and secure housing options, free from undue legal challenges.