Registration of Real Estate Projects — Land Law Notes

Registration of Real Estate Projects

Before RERA, builders loved the “soft launch”. A developer would advertise and start booking flats months before he had a single approval in hand — collecting cash on a project that might never get sanctioned. Buyers chased the discounted “pre-launch” price and walked straight into the trap: if the approvals never came, their money was gone. Section 3 slams that door. The single most important rule in the whole Act is short and blunt — no registration, no selling. Until the Authority has registered the project, the builder cannot so much as advertise it.

What registration means, and why it is the gate

Here is the everyday picture: registration is the project’s licence to be sold. The Authority will not register a project unless the builder already holds all the requisite approvals and discloses the plans, the timeline and the money arrangements — so registration itself becomes the buyer’s guarantee that the project is real and legally clean. It is the mandatory first gate of the whole scheme, and the rules sit in sections 3 to 8.

The prohibition in section 3 is deliberately wide. A promoter shall not advertise, market, book, sell or offer for sale, or invite persons to purchase, any plot, apartment or building in a real estate project (or any part of it) in any planning area without first registering the project with the Authority. Where a project is developed in phases, each phase is treated as a standalone project and registered separately.

Section 3(1), RERA, 2016: “No promoter shall advertise, market, book, sell or offer for sale, or invite persons to purchase in any manner any plot, apartment or building, as the case may be, in any real estate project or part of it, in any planning area, without registering the real estate project with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority …”

In Simple Terms: The builder cannot do anything to sell the project — not even put up a hoarding — until the Authority has registered it. Registration comes first; everything else the builder wants to do comes second.

A. Projects EXEMPT from registration (s. 3(2))

Not every project needs registration. Learn these four exemptions precisely, because a short note often asks only for them:

  1. Small projects — where the area of land proposed to be developed does not exceed 500 square metres, or the number of apartments proposed does not exceed 8 (inclusive of all phases).
  2. Already-completed projects — where the promoter received the completion certificate before the Act commenced.
  3. Repair / renovation / re-development — work that does not involve marketing, advertising, selling or new allotment of any apartment, plot or building.

🔑 The 500-square-metre limit and the 8-apartment limit are alternatives, not both — cross either threshold and the project must be registered.

B. Registration of ongoing projects

This is a favourite point. Projects that were ongoing when the Act commenced — construction begun but no completion certificate yet issued — are not exempt. Their promoters had to apply for registration within three months of the Act’s commencement. It was precisely this pull-in of ongoing projects that builders challenged as “retrospective”; the Bombay High Court rejected the challenge in Neelkamal Realtors vs Union of India (2017).

C. The application for registration (s. 4) — what the promoter must disclose

Every promoter applies to the Authority in the prescribed form with the prescribed fee, and must enclose, among other documents:

  1. Details of the promoter — name, registered address, type of enterprise, and his track record of projects launched in the past five years (including any delays and pending cases).
  2. Authenticated copies of all approvals and the commencement certificate from the competent authority.
  3. The sanctioned plan, layout plan and specifications of the project.
  4. The proforma of the allotment letter, agreement for sale and conveyance deed to be used with allottees.
  5. The number, type and carpet area of the apartments, and details of garages.
  6. Names and addresses of the real estate agents, contractors, architect and structural engineer.
  7. A declaration on affidavit stating that he has legal title to the land, that the land is free from encumbrances, the time period for completion, and — the heart of it — that seventy per cent of the amounts realised from allottees will be deposited in a separate account in a scheduled bank, to cover the construction and land cost, and used only for that project.

🔑 THE 70% ESCROW RULE (s. 4(2)(l)(D)) — the promoter may withdraw from that separate account only in proportion to the percentage of completion, and only after an engineer, an architect and a chartered accountant each certify that the withdrawal matches the work done. This is what stops the builder using one project’s money on another.

D. Grant of registration (s. 5) and after

On receiving the application the Authority, within 30 days, either:

  1. grants registration — issuing a registration number, a login ID and a password to access the website and upload the project’s details; or
  2. rejects the application for reasons recorded in writing (only after giving the promoter an opportunity of being heard).

If the Authority does neither within 30 days, the project is deemed registered — silence works in the builder’s favour, but only because the timeline is meant to be strict. Registration stays valid for the completion period declared by the promoter. It can be extended (s. 6) only for force majeure (war, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or like natural calamity) or other reasonable cause, and the extension cannot exceed one year in aggregate. It can be revoked (s. 7) if the promoter defaults, breaches the approval’s terms, or indulges in unfair practice — after 30 days’ notice — whereupon the Authority may freeze the project’s bank account and let the association of allottees take over the remaining works (ss. 7–8).

E. Effect of non-registration

Selling without registration is not a technicality: under section 59 it attracts a penalty up to 10% of the estimated project cost, and continued default can bring an additional fine up to 10%, or imprisonment up to three years, or both (Topic 8).

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — must this project register?

Facts. (i) A builder plans a 40-flat apartment complex on 900 sq m and starts booking flats through newspaper ads before applying to the Authority. (ii) A housing society repaints and re-waterproofs its existing building, with no new flats sold.

Rule. Section 3 bars advertising/booking/selling before registration; s. 3(2) exempts projects up to 500 sq m or up to 8 apartments, completed projects, and pure repair/renovation not involving new allotment.

Apply. (i) 900 sq m and 40 flats crosses both thresholds, so registration is mandatory — and advertising and booking before registering breaches s. 3, exposing the builder to the s. 59 penalty. (ii) Repair with no new allotment falls in the s. 3(2) exemption, so no registration is needed.

Conclusion. The first project is caught and the builder is already in breach; the second is genuinely exempt. Always test the fact-pattern against the exact thresholds before answering.

flowchart TD
    ROOT["Registration of a Real Estate Project<br/>(ss. 3-8)"]:::root
    ROOT --> Q{"Exempt under s.3(2)?<br/>land <= 500 sqm OR <= 8 apts;<br/>completed; pure repair"}:::decide
    Q -->|"Yes"| EX["No registration needed"]:::leaf
    Q -->|"No"| APP["s.4 Apply to Authority<br/>approvals, sanctioned plan, carpet area,<br/>promoter track record,<br/>affidavit + 70% escrow declaration"]:::leaf
    APP --> DEC{"s.5 Authority decides<br/>within 30 days"}:::decide
    DEC -->|"Grant"| REG["Registration no. + login;<br/>upload project details"]:::leaf
    DEC -->|"Reject (reasons, hearing)"| REJ["No selling"]:::warn
    DEC -->|"No decision in 30 days"| DEEM["Deemed registered"]:::leaf
    REG --> EXT["s.6 Extension: force majeure only,<br/>max 1 year"]:::leaf
    REG --> REV["s.7-8 Revocation on default;<br/>freeze account; allottees may take over"]:::warn
    classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:1px,color:#000;
    classDef leaf fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
    classDef decide fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#92400E,color:#000;
    classDef warn fill:#FDECEA,stroke:#B22222,color:#000;
    linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;

Case Laws

  • Neelkamal Realtors and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India (2017) — upheld the compulsory registration of ongoing projects; requiring registration of projects that lack a completion certificate is valid and not impermissibly retrospective.
  • M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Uttar Pradesh (2021) — reaffirmed that registration and the Act’s disclosure regime bind ongoing projects, protecting allottees who booked before the Act.
  • Bikram Chatterji vs Union of India (2019) (the Amrapali case) — where a promoter grossly defaulted and diverted buyers’ funds, the Supreme Court cancelled the registration/lease and put completion in the hands of a court-appointed agency to protect the homebuyers — the enforcement teeth behind ss. 7–8.

Back to Top

📄 Full notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past KSLU questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · 10 Solved Problems · All Land Law topics

Info

download our exam preparation kit for your exam