Builders fleece despite new Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Homebuyers see no end to fleecing by builders even after the newly-formed Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA) made registration of new buildings mandatory from April 1 as a similar Act passed 33 years back remains on paper.

The KRERA, set up under the Kerala Real Estate (Development and Regulation) Act, has made registration mandatory for all commercial and housing projects with a total area of 1,000 square metre or 12 units obtaining permission after April 1, so that it could address consumer complaints.

Though the initiative aims at giving relief to buyers, many are apprehensive over its effective enforcement. They cite the failure of the 1983 Kerala Apartment Ownership (KAO) Act to regulate builders. “Despite a High Court directive in 2014 that all apartments should be registered under the KAO Act, there was no effort on the part of the government to enforce it. Hence, builders still manage to fleece customers easily with poor quality construction and lack of promised amenities,” lawyer D. B. Binu said.

Apartment Owners’ Apex Association president V.K. Sankarankutty stated that they were unable to make builders accountable for unkept promises or poor construction. “The government gives little priority to our concerns, may under pressure from the real estate lobby. Hence, the fate of the new Act could be no different,” he said. Meanwhile, there is also demand to make the recently passed Real Estate Act of the Centre applicable in the state as it would bring more buildings under scrutiny.

While the state Act brings projects with 1,000 square metre or 12 units only under its purview, the Central law covered even projects with 500 square metre or eight units.

KRERA chair S. Ajayakumar said only the state Act could be made applicable without further amendments while Mr Binu pointed out that since transaction of property was a subject under the Concurrent List, the Central Act would override the state Act.

Owners of residential apartments were also quite apprehensive that the state Act contained loopholes favouring builders.