T’puram: Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA) directed a builder in the state capital to pay two homebuyers simple interest at 16.65% per annum for the delay in handing over a flat in Sparrow Paradise project at Kudappanakunnu. The buyers, Dr Ullas Raghavan and Shakuntala Prabhakaran, had paid around Rs 1.02 crore for the 1,765 sq ft flat. The interest will be calculated from Dec 1, 2018 (the day after the promised completion date) on the Rs 54.41 lakh advance they had paid and on subsequent payments from the respective dates of payment until the flat is handed over.K-RERA directed Sparrow Construction Management & Consultancy and its partner, Jahad A Majeed, to pay the interest within 60 days of the order issued on July 20. It also ordered them to complete the flat and common amenities within six months, obtain occupancy certificate and execute the sale deed before handing over the flat. The authority issued the order 14 months after it heard both parties and reserved its decision on May 29, 2025. The complaint was filed in 2023.The authority rejected the buyers’ demand for 20% interest and fixed the rate at 16.65% under the applicable statutory formula. It held that the promoter could not cite demonetisation, the floods of 2018 and 2019, the pandemic and labour shortages to justify the delay of over seven years.The project, scheduled to be completed by Nov 30, 2018, is yet to be finished. The complainants, who are based in the UK, had also alleged that the builder was exerting pressure on them to take possession of the flat though the project had not received an occupancy certificate from Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. The builder also sought more money while the buyers were awaiting K-RERA’s order. They alleged this to the authority in a letter dated Oct 25, 2025, five months after the hearing was completed.In a representation to K-RERA, the buyers alleged that the builder applied for an occupancy certificate only on July 31, 2025, after the hearing had concluded and subsequently demanded power and water connection charges. They contended that this showed the project remained incomplete and was not ready for lawful possession.
