A recent order by the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA) has underscored an important distinction often overlooked by homebuyers: a completion certificate issued by an architect is not equivalent to one issued by a competent authority. While an architect’s certificate only reflects professional verification of construction, a completion certificate from the competent authority confirms that the project complies with statutory and regulatory requirements.
The observation came during proceedings related to a housing project in Bengaluru, where apartment buyers alleged that several mandatory compliances remained incomplete despite possession having already been handed over.
“In this regard, though the respondent No.1 has produced a copy of the certificate issued by their architect certifying that the said project has been completed according to the sanctioned plans, it is not sufficient unless and until it is issued by the competent authority,” KRERA said in its order.
The ruling has renewed attention on what completion certificates actually signify and what buyers should verify before moving into a property.
Also Read: Karnataka RERA: Projects that applied for OC before RERA came into effect need not be registered
What is a completion certificate?
A completion certificate is a statutory document issued upon completion of a project in accordance with the approved building plans and applicable regulations. Legal experts point out that, under the RERA Act, a completion certificate is nothing but an occupancy certificate.
“Additional disclosure by promoters of ongoing projects… (iv) where all development works have been completed as per the Act and certified by the competent agency, and an application has been filed with the competent authority for the issue of a completion certificate/occupation certificate,” Chapter 2, 4(V) of the RERA Act mentions.
According to Vittal BR, an advocate at the Karnataka High Court, many buyers confuse certificates issued by architects with certificates issued by government competent authorities.
“An architect can certify that the building has been constructed according to the sanctioned plan and that construction supervision has been carried out as required. However, an architect cannot issue a statutory completion certificate. That can only be issued by the competent authority,” he said.
The competent authority examines whether the project conforms to the sanctioned plan, whether required approvals have been obtained, and whether the building complies with applicable development and safety regulations before issuing the certificate, legal experts said.
The distinction is important because an architect’s certificate merely records professional verification of construction, while a completion certificate issued by the authority confirms regulatory compliance, Vittal pointed out.
What does RERA say?
In the Bengaluru KRERA order, the promoter submitted a certificate from the project architect stating that the project had been completed in January 2021 in accordance with the sanctioned plans.
However, KRERA held that such certification alone was insufficient. In its order, the authority clarified that an architect’s certification alone cannot substitute a statutory completion certificate issued by the competent authority.
Quoting Section 11(4)(b) of the RERA Act, the order said that the promoter is responsible for obtaining “the completion certificate or the occupancy certificate or both as applicable from the relevant competent authority”.
The authority further observed, “Though the developer has produced a copy of the certificate issued by their architect certifying that the said project has been completed on 27.01.2021, according to the sanctioned plans, it is not sufficient unless and until the competent authority issues it.”
In another order in July 2023, the Karnataka RERA held that a project will be deemed complete only if the competent authority issues a completion certificate. Even if a project was completed before the RERA Act was passed, a completion certificate issued by an architect is not valid proof of completion, the order had said.
What should homebuyers know?
Legal experts say homebuyers should independently verify whether the occupancy certificate (OC) or completion certificate has been issued by the relevant planning authority before taking possession of a flat.
“Homebuyers often assume that possession can be taken once construction is completed. Legally, the more important question is whether the competent authority has certified the building as fit for occupation,” Vittal said.
“Ideally, buyers should not move into a project before the occupancy certificate or completion has been issued. The certificate confirms that the building has been constructed according to the sanctioned plan and is fit for occupation,” he said.
Vittal said that buyers should verify certificates directly with the relevant authority, such as the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) or other sanctioning bodies, rather than relying solely on documents issued by architects or assurances from developers.
