Haryana RERA's Three Tests for a Valid Possession Offer: A Guide for Bengaluru Buyers

The developer had its occupation certificate on 30 September 2024 and sent an offer of possession in January 2026. But an email dated 10 September 2026 showed that some development work in the penthouse was still pending and that the developer was not in a position to hand it over. Was the offer valid? In a ruling reported on 30 October 2026, the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority at Gurugram said no, and set out a three-part test that any buyer, including in Bengaluru, can use to judge a possession letter.

The order, in Complaint No. 3682 of 2025 against Godrej Real View Developers Private Limited over a penthouse in Godrej Meridien-II, Sector 106, Gurugram, was passed by Member Phool Singh Saini and reported by LiveLaw. Haryana RERA is another state's regulator, so treat its reasoning as a guide rather than a rule for K-RERA, but it makes a useful checklist for any buyer. This guide is buyer guidance on a reported order, not legal advice.

The short answer. Haryana RERA said a valid offer of possession must be made after obtaining the occupation certificate, the unit must be in habitable condition, and the offer must not come with unreasonable additional demands. Because the penthouse was not ready, it declared the offer invalid and ordered interest at 10.80 percent a year on the amount paid from 30 March 2024 until actual handover. The trade-off: refusing an offer you believe is invalid can protect your delay interest, but it is your judgment against the builder's until an authority rules, so record the unit's condition and the demands in writing before you refuse.

What are Haryana RERA's three conditions?

An OC, a habitable unit and fair demands. The authority said, as quoted in the report, that "a valid offer of possession must have following components: i. Possession must be offered after obtaining occupation certificate. ii. The subject unit should be in habitable condition. iii. Possession should not be accompanied by unreasonable additional demands."

It added that a "mere offer of possession of a unit has no meaning and serves no purpose if actual possession of the unit cannot be handed over." In other words, an occupation certificate for the building does not by itself make an offer valid if the particular unit is not ready.

What happened in the Godrej Meridien-II case?

A long delay and a disputed bill. According to the report, the buyers booked the penthouse on 25 October 2018 and executed an agreement for sale on 4 December 2018 for Rs 4.70 crore, and paid about Rs 4.23 crore. The agreement set 30 September 2023 as the possession date, with a six-month grace period to 30 March 2024. They filed their complaint on 1 August 2025.

The dates show why the validity of the offer mattered so much. The occupation certificate came about six months after the extended deadline of 30 March 2024, and the offer of possession came in January 2026, more than a year after the certificate. If the January 2026 offer had been treated as valid, delay interest might have stopped there. Because the authority found it invalid, interest runs until actual handover.

The buyers also challenged Rs 72.51 lakh charged under the head "exclusive area of the unit", alleging it was calculated on super area rather than carpet area. The developer said Rs 47.98 lakh remained payable by the buyers, and cited COVID-19 restrictions, labour shortages, material supply disruptions and pollution-related construction bans for the delay.

Why did the authority reject the force majeure defence?

Because of the dates. The report says the authority noted that the buyers had booked the unit and received the allotment letter before the pandemic, and that the agreement already allowed a six-month grace period, taking the deadline to 30 March 2024. On that basis it did not accept the developer's reasons as grounds to excuse the delay.

What did the authority order?

Interest, completion and a corrected bill. According to the report, it directed the developer to pay interest at 10.80 percent a year on the amount paid, from 30 March 2024 until actual handover, and to complete the remaining work in the unit within 30 days. It ordered the developer not to charge anything that did not form part of the agreement for sale, held that demands must comply with the agreement and the applicable RERA provisions, and said charges could not be based on super area instead of carpet area.

The developer must issue a revised statement of account within 30 days, adjusting delayed possession interest and other unlawful charges, and pay interest accrued up to the date of the order within 90 days. The buyers must clear any outstanding dues, after adjustment, within 60 days of receiving the revised statement. The developer was also directed to execute the registered conveyance deed within 90 days, subject to payment of stamp duty and administrative charges. The report says Advocate Harshit Batra appeared for the buyers and Advocate Rohan Malik for the developer, and cites the case as 2026 LLBiz RERA (HR) 156.

What counts as an unreasonable demand?

The order gives two practical markers. First, demands must comply with the agreement and the applicable RERA provisions, and the developer was told not to charge the buyers for anything that did not form part of the agreement for sale. Second, charges could not be based on super area instead of carpet area, and unlawful charges were to be adjusted against the amounts payable.

The order did not wipe out what the buyers owed. It set a sequence: a revised statement of account from the developer within 30 days, adjusting delay interest and unlawful charges, and then payment of any outstanding dues by the buyers within 60 days of receiving it. That is a useful model for a buyer facing a disputed bill: separate the amounts that are clearly due under the agreement from those that are not, and ask for a corrected statement rather than refusing everything.

How does this compare with Karnataka rulings?

It points in a similar direction on timing. In a Karnataka case we covered today, the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal treated an occupancy certificate as effective only from the date violations were shown to be cured, not from the date it was first issued; see our report on the Casa Grande Lorenza OC ruling. Both decisions look past the certificate's date to whether the home could actually and lawfully be occupied.

The two are not the same test, and the Haryana order comes from another state's regulator. But together they suggest a buyer should judge a possession offer by the state of the unit and the fairness of the bill, not just by whether a certificate exists. For how Karnataka's tribunal treats an outstanding balance at possession, see our report on the ALN Arambh ruling.

What should a Bengaluru buyer do when a possession letter arrives?

Test it against the three conditions. Ask for the occupancy certificate and its date. Inspect your unit for completion and habitability, with photographs and a dated list of pending work. Compare every amount demanded with the agreement for sale and the payment schedule, and ask in writing how any area-based charge was calculated. If something is missing, reply in writing before the deadline in the letter, saying what is incomplete and which demands you dispute, and pay what is clearly due under the agreement.

A seven-point checklist for judging a possession offer

1. Ask for the occupancy certificate and note its date.
2. Inspect your own unit and list any pending work with photographs.
3. Compare every demand in the offer letter with the agreement for sale.
4. Ask how area-based charges were calculated, and whether carpet area was used.
5. Reply in writing within the offer's deadline if the unit is not ready.
6. Pay amounts clearly due under the agreement, and dispute the rest in writing.
7. Keep the offer letter, your reply and later emails, since dates can decide delay interest.

Frequently asked questions

What are the three conditions for a valid possession offer?

According to the reported order, Haryana RERA said possession must be offered after obtaining the occupation certificate, the unit should be in habitable condition, and possession should not be accompanied by unreasonable additional demands. It said a mere offer has no meaning if actual possession cannot be handed over.

Does an occupation certificate make a possession offer valid?

Not by itself, on Haryana RERA's reasoning. In the Godrej Meridien-II case the developer had obtained the certificate in September 2024, but pending work in the unit meant it could not hand over possession, so the authority declared the offer invalid.

What did Haryana RERA order the developer to pay?

Interest at 10.80 percent a year on the amount paid, from 30 March 2024 until actual handover, with accrued interest up to the order paid within 90 days. It also ordered completion of pending work within 30 days and a revised statement of account removing unlawful charges.

Does this Haryana ruling apply in Bengaluru?

Haryana RERA is another state's regulator, so treat its reasoning as a guide rather than a rule for K-RERA. Its three tests are still a practical checklist for a Bengaluru buyer judging a possession letter: check the occupancy certificate, inspect the unit, and compare every demand with the agreement.

Last updated 2026-11-04. PropNewz Team.