Developer Liable To Fix Non-Structural Defects Reported Within Five Years: TN RERA

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has held that a developer remains liable to rectify defects arising from poor workmanship, including non-structural cracks and seepage, where such defects are brought to its notice within five years from the date of handing over possession.

“As per Section 11(4)(a) of the RERA Act, the Respondent Promoter is responsible for all obligations and functions under the provision of the Act. Further, as per Section 14(3) of the RERA Act, any structural or any other defects in workmanship, quality or provision of services is brought to the notice of the Respondent within period of five years from the date of handing over possession, it shall be the duty of the Respondent Promoter to rectify such defects without further charges within thirty days.", the authority observed. 

A coram comprising Chairperson Shiv Das Meena and Members Dr. L. Subramanian and Sukumar Chittibabu passed the order on April 10, 2026.

The Authority directed Sai UVR Properties Ltd. to carry out complete rectification of the defects in the complainant's villa on or before May 31, 2026.

The dispute arose from a complaint filed by Tarun Chatterjee, who purchased a villa in the “Utsav Prashanthi” project in Coimbatore under a construction agreement and sale deed executed on May 30, 2023. Possession of the villa was handed over on June 1, 2023.

According to Chatterjee, even before taking possession, several defects, including cracks in walls, improper fittings, damaged tiles and electrical issues, were brought to the developer's notice in May 2023, based on assurances that they would be rectified.

Limited repair work was carried out by the developer in November 2023, including partial repainting, clearing a sink blockage and replacing some chipped tiles. However, several defects continued to persist despite repeated follow-ups by the complainant between December 2023 and February 2024.

Matters worsened on March 4, 2024, when large cracks, some stretching beyond five feet, appeared across both interior and exterior walls. In several instances, these cracks resurfaced even after earlier repair attempts.

Chatterjee maintained that although the defects had been reported within one year of taking possession, the developer did not carry out the necessary repairs. After efforts to resolve the issue amicably failed, he approached the Authority seeking rectification of the defects or, alternatively, a refund along with compensation.

Sai UVR Properties Ltd., in response, characterized the cracks as “hairline” or “air cracks,” arguing that they did not qualify as structural defects. Referring to Clause 8 of the construction agreement, the developer asserted that its liability was confined to structural defects, with such minor cracks expressly excluded.

It further relied on expert material, including a structural consultant's certificate, to support its position that no structural defects existed, while denying allegations of poor workmanship or the use of improper materials.

After examining the material on record, including reports of experts engaged by both sides, the Authority found that although the cracks did not qualify as structural defects, they were attributable to poor workmanship.

It further noted that while the developer had undertaken certain rectification works, the repairs were not carried out completely, as cracks and seepage continued to persist in the villa.

Holding that defects in workmanship reported within the statutory period must be rectified, the Authority directed the developer to carry out complete rectification of all defects in the complainant's villa by May 31, 2026.

For Complainant (Tarun Chatterjee): Party-in-person.

For Respondent (M/s Sai UVR Properties Ltd.): Leela & Co.