The Supreme Court has raised serious concerns about the functioning of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), questioning whether the regulator has effectively served homebuyers. During a recent hearing, the bench observed that RERA appears to have fallen short of delivering concrete results and, in some instances, seems to benefit defaulting builders more than aggrieved buyers.
The court remarked that the objective behind enacting the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 was to ensure transparency, accountability, and timely delivery of housing projects. However, delays and unresolved complaints continue to trouble many homebuyers across the country.
RERA was introduced to safeguard buyers from project delays and financial uncertainty in the real estate sector. The court’s sharp observations have reignited debate over whether structural reforms are needed to strengthen the regulator and restore public confidence.
The matter has sparked nationwide discussion within the real estate industry and among policy experts about improving regulatory efficiency and protecting consumer interests.
