Casagrand Casablanca Flat Re-Allotted: K-RERA Awards Rs 5 Lakh to Bengaluru Buyer

On October 30, 2025, a buyer visited the site of Casagrand Casablanca in Bengaluru South to check on Flat T1-1411, a 3 BHK on the 14th floor allotted to them ten months earlier. They had paid Rs 16,50,016. At the site, the buyer learnt the flat had been re-allotted to someone else, with an agreement for sale already signed with that third party. On November 18, 2025, the project head wrote that the original flat could not be allotted because another customer had paid 50 percent.

On October 7, 2026, the Adjudicating Officer of the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority ruled on the buyer's compensation claim. The K-RERA order in Complaint No. 00877/2026, against Casagrand Lotus Private Limited, awarded Rs 5 lakh and found that taking more than 10 percent of the price without executing an agreement for sale was a clear violation of the RERA Act. The respondent did not appear and was placed ex parte, so the order rests on the buyer's documents.

The short answer. K-RERA's Adjudicating Officer held that the promoter received Rs 16,50,016, more than 10 percent of the Rs 1,64,99,147.70 price, without an agreement for sale, and then executed an agreement for the same flat with a third party. It awarded Rs 5 lakh compensation for mental agony, financial loss and loss of opportunity, payable within 60 days, failing which interest at MCLR plus 2 percent applies, plus Rs 7,000 costs. The buyer had sought Rs 40.5 lakh in all. The trade-off: RERA compensation can recognise lost appreciation, but it is assessed case by case, and a separate refund claim is still pending.

What happened to Flat T1-1411?

According to the order, the project is registered with K-RERA under number PRM/KA/RERA/1251/310/PR/040524/006862, valid from April 30, 2024 to May 4, 2029, and sits on survey numbers in Mallasandra village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Ward No. 198, Bengaluru South. The buyer paid a booking advance of Rs 1,00,000 on December 28, 2024 and received an allotment letter on December 30, 2024 for Unit T1-1411, a 3 BHK of 1,270 sq ft carpet area with one car parking space, for Rs 1,64,99,147.70 inclusive of GST.

The buyer said a payment schedule was agreed in writing with a sales representative: 10 percent at booking and agreement, 30 percent during 2025, and the balance on a construction linked schedule from 2026. The buyer paid Rs 15,50,016 on January 19, 2025 and received a draft agreement for sale by email on January 23, 2025. On February 12, 2025, the promoter's CRM team said the agreed schedule had not been internally approved and raised a fresh demand of Rs 57.74 lakh in place of about Rs 35 lakh. No agreement was executed.

What did the promoter tell the buyer before the flat went to someone else?

Mixed messages, according to the buyer's account as recorded in the order. On June 28, 2025, an email titled as a refund for the unit asked for bank details, though the buyer had sought neither cancellation nor refund. On July 1, 2025, the buyer was told by email that no cancellation had been initiated and that the refund ticket was a miscommunication. The buyer says assurances continued through October 2025.

Then came the October 30, 2025 site visit and the November 18, 2025 written communication from the project head, which the order quotes as saying the original flat could not be allotted because another customer paid 50 percent. The buyer had also sold a residential site in Marsur village, Anekal Taluk, by a sale deed dated January 18, 2025 for Rs 1,02,71,250, to raise funds for this purchase, and said the proceeds then sat idle.

The evidence matters as much as the story. The order lists what the buyer produced: the allotment letter, email communications, payment receipts, the sale deed for the plot sold to raise funds, the draft agreement for sale, WhatsApp communication, a legal notice dated December 18, 2025, and the promoter's own webpage setting out the prevailing price range of units in Phase II of the project. The respondent produced no documents.

What did K-RERA find?

Two things. First, it found from the payment receipts that the respondent received Rs 16,50,016, which it described as more than 10 percent of the sale consideration, without executing an agreement of sale, which it called a clear violation of the RERA Act. Ten percent of the Rs 1,64,99,147.70 price works out to about Rs 16,49,915, so the amount received was only marginally above that line, but above it all the same. Second, it found from the allotment letter, emails and draft agreement that, despite allotting T1-1411 and receiving that money, the respondent executed an agreement for the flat in favour of a third party.

Our guide to the 10 percent rule before an agreement for sale explains why that threshold matters. In this case, it is one of the two findings on which the compensation rests.

How did K-RERA decide on Rs 5 lakh?

By weighing the buyer's claimed losses against the statutory factors. The buyer claimed Rs 15 lakh for mental agony, Rs 25 lakh for financial loss and loss of opportunity, and Rs 50,000 as costs. The buyer's case was that the plot sold to fund the flat would have appreciated by roughly 20 to 30 percent over the period, that similar flats now cost substantially more, and that about 18 months of uncertainty followed, from January 2025 until the complaint was filed in July 2026. These were the buyer's averments; the respondent filed no documents in reply.

The order extracts Section 72 of the RERA Act, which lists the factors the Adjudicating Officer considers: disproportionate gain or unfair advantage, the loss caused, the repetitive nature of the default, and other factors necessary in the interest of justice. It said no hard and fast rule can be laid down for mental agony, and that it had to consider the amount paid and how long the money was held.

The order made a point buyers should note. Where possession is eventually delivered, it said, compensation may ordinarily be lower since the allottee gets the benefit of appreciation; where only a refund is directed, compensation may be higher because the allottee is deprived of both possession and escalation in value. The buyer had pointed to the promoter's own marketing, which quoted a comparable flat in the same tower about Rs 26 lakh higher. Holding that the buyer was deprived of the use and enjoyment of the flat despite paying part of the price, the officer awarded Rs 5 lakh. Our explainer on Section 71 and 72 compensation covers how these claims work.

What happens next, and is there a refund?

The refund is a separate case. The order notes that the buyer has filed another complaint, CMP No. 876/2026, before the RERA Authority seeking a refund with interest, which is pending adjudication. This compensation order directs payment of Rs 5 lakh within 60 days, failing which interest at MCLR plus 2 percent per annum runs from the 61st day until realisation, and Rs 7,000 towards litigation costs. It leaves the buyer at liberty to take action in accordance with law if the respondent fails to comply.

The order also records that it could not be passed within the period prescribed under Section 71(2) because of adjournments sought by the complainant and other procedural reasons. Hearings took place on August 18, August 28, September 10 and September 18, 2026. The project's listing on PropNewz is at Casagrand Casablanca, for buyers who want to compare its registration details.

What should a Bengaluru buyer do after an allotment letter?

Push for the agreement for sale before paying past 10 percent, and keep every written promise. This buyer's case rested on documents: the allotment letter, emails approving the payment plan, the draft agreement, the refund email and the project head's written admission.

1. Check the project's K-RERA registration number and validity before paying a booking advance.
2. Do not pay more than 10 percent of the price until an agreement for sale is executed.
3. Get any agreed payment schedule confirmed in writing by an authorised representative.
4. Reply in writing at once to any unexpected refund or cancellation email.
5. Visit the site and ask in writing for confirmation that your unit is still allotted to you.
6. Keep records of any asset you sell to fund the purchase, with dates and amounts.
7. Consider filing both a refund complaint and a compensation complaint if the flat is re-allotted.

Frequently asked questions

What did K-RERA order in the Casagrand Casablanca case?

On October 7, 2026, K-RERA's Adjudicating Officer directed Casagrand Lotus Private Limited to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation within 60 days, failing which interest at MCLR plus 2 percent per annum applies from the 61st day, plus Rs 7,000 litigation costs. The respondent did not appear and was placed ex parte.

Can a builder take more than 10 percent before an agreement for sale?

In this order, K-RERA held that receiving Rs 16,50,016, which it described as more than 10 percent of the sale consideration, without executing an agreement of sale was a clear violation of the RERA Act. That finding was one basis for the compensation awarded to the buyer.

Does lost property appreciation count in RERA compensation?

The order said that where only a refund is directed, compensation may be higher because the allottee is deprived of both possession and escalation in value. It awarded Rs 5 lakh here against a claim of Rs 15 lakh for mental agony and Rs 25 lakh for financial loss and loss of opportunity.

Did the buyer also get a refund?

Not in this order. It notes that the buyer has filed a separate complaint, CMP No. 876/2026, before the RERA Authority seeking a refund with interest, which was pending adjudication. The Adjudicating Officer's order deals only with compensation and litigation costs.

Last updated 2026-10-29. PropNewz Team.