Bengaluru: The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA) has dismissed a homebuyer’s complaint seeking ₹18 lakh compensation from Sumadhura Infracon Pvt Ltd over an alleged shortfall in the dimensions of a room in a flat at the Folium by Sumadhura Phase-II project.
The complaint was filed under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, by Rekha Chawla and Apoorva Singh, who alleged that a bedroom in their flat was smaller than the dimensions shown in the project brochure.
According to the complaint, the flat was booked in 2023 after the buyers relied on the floor plan and dimensions shown in the brochure. They claimed that while the brochure showed one bedroom as measuring 14 feet 2 inches in width, the actual width was only 12 feet 2 inches, leaving the room too small for use. They sought ₹18 lakh as compensation for the alleged shortage in carpet area.
The flat, bearing No. D-1601, is on the 16th floor of the project. The complainants entered into an agreement of sale with Sumadhura Infracon in June 2023 and subsequently executed the registered sale deed in April 2026 for a consideration of about ₹2.48 crore. 652260929103753watermark
The developer disputed the allegations and maintained that the buyers had accepted the dimensions contained in the agreement of sale and the floor plan annexed to it. It argued that the dimensions shown in the sanctioned plan and floor plan were accurate and that there had been no deviation in the measurements.
The developer also submitted that the plans had been made available to the complainants and uploaded on the RERA website. According to its submission, the discrepancy in the brochure was a typographical error, while the dimensions in the agreement of sale and the plan were correctly recorded and accepted by the buyers.
In its order, K-RERA noted that the dimensions mentioned in the agreements and sale deed were the same — 12 feet 2 inches for the room in question. It also observed that the apartment plans had been uploaded on the RERA website and that there was no change in the dimensions as alleged by the complainants.
The authority further pointed out that the buyers had not raised any objection regarding the dimensions during the period between entering into the agreement and execution of the sale deed. It noted that they had paid the sale consideration according to the measurements specified in the agreement and that no additional amount had been charged by the developer on account of the measurements.
K-RERA also referred to a Karnataka High Court decision which held that once a sale deed is executed, it supersedes the earlier agreement of sale in respect of the matters covered by it. The authority found the principle applicable to the present case.
The adjudicating officer, Maheshwari S Hiremath, ultimately dismissed complaint No. 00652/2026. The order, pronounced on September 28, 2026, said there would be no order as to costs.
