In a significant turn of events for residents of Agastya, a residential project in North Bengaluru, 21 aggrieved homebuyers have taken legal recourse against the developer, Ishtika Homes Pvt Ltd, citing unfulfilled promises of key amenities — the most prominent being a rooftop swimming pool and a non-functional sewage treatment plant (STP). The case, brought before the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA), has now resulted in a directive that could shape how builder-buyer conflicts are handled in the state going forward.
What Sparked the Dispute Between Homebuyers and the Builder?
The core of the dispute lies in unkept promises and incomplete amenities. According to the buyers, several crucial facilities—such as a rooftop swimming pool, functional STP, gym, intercom, yoga hall, and kids’ play area—were clearly mentioned in the project brochure and sale agreements but remain either incomplete or non-functional even after possession was handed over. For the 60-unit Agastya project, most units are now occupied, and the lack of promised infrastructure has left homeowners disillusioned.
What Did KRERA Say About the Missing Rooftop Swimming Pool?
KRERA found that although possession had been given, the rooftop swimming pool was never constructed. The developer cited “differing opinions among homebuyers” as the reason for the delay. However, KRERA took a firm stand and directed Ishtika Homes to hold a joint meeting of all allottees within 30 days. Based on the majority consensus, the builder must either:
- Construct the promised rooftop swimming pool, or
- Refund the amount collected for it
This directive aims to ensure that all buyers have a say in the final outcome while holding the developer accountable.
What About the Sewage Treatment Plant and Water Supply Issues?
Another major pain point for residents is poor water quality. Despite assurances of a BWSSB (Cauvery water) connection, the residents are still reliant on borewell water. The builder had collected deposits from buyers promising a BWSSB supply, but no timeline or visible progress has been communicated.
A water treatment plant was reportedly installed, but according to buyers, it is either defective or never worked. Residents have complained of recurring health issues, especially among children, due to the hard water, making this not just a contractual failure but a public health concern.
KRERA has taken note and rejected the builder’s claim that poor maintenance by residents caused these issues. Instead, it clarified that the onus of proving functionality lies with the builder, especially for common services promised in the project’s sanctioned plan.
How Did KRERA Address the Gym, Yoga Hall, and Other Amenities?
In its order, KRERA noted that some amenities such as the gym and yoga hall have been incorporated into a multi-purpose clubhouse. Since these were not explicitly mentioned as standalone facilities in the sale agreement, and a basic version has been provided, KRERA did not issue further directions on this matter.
However, the broader issue of incomplete amenities remains a major concern for the residents, especially given that these offerings influenced their decision to invest in the project.
Is the Builder Being Transparent About the STP and Power Backup?
The builder claimed the STP became non-functional due to poor upkeep but has since been repaired. However, no documentation or third-party validation has been submitted to back this claim.
To verify the status, KRERA has now ordered the builder to:
- Submit a third-party certified report from a qualified engineer or environmental consultant detailing the operational status of the STP and power backup systems.
This report is expected to provide clarity on whether the builder has genuinely addressed the issues or is simply deflecting responsibility.
What Did KRERA Say About the Residents’ Association?
An additional complaint from buyers was the delayed and questionable formation of the residents’ association. KRERA has now directed the builder to:
- Provide a written assurance within 10 days that the association’s registration will not override or interfere with ongoing grievances.
This measure ensures that the registration of the association doesn’t dilute the residents’ legal rights or nullify their complaints.
What’s Next for the Homebuyers and Ishtika Homes?
The outcome of the upcoming joint meeting and the third-party report on STP functionality will be crucial in determining the way forward. If the majority of residents opt for a refund instead of the rooftop pool, Ishtika Homes will be bound to comply. Similarly, the developer must now back its claims with hard evidence, not just statements.
KRERA’s proactive intervention has offered a much-needed mechanism for resolution and accountability in this case. However, this situation also sheds light on the wider issues plaguing real estate projects, where homebuyers often struggle to enforce terms promised at the time of sale.
Final Thoughts
The Agastya project controversy is a wake-up call for both builders and buyers. While developers must understand the legal weight of every commitment made in brochures and agreements, buyers must remain vigilant and united when seeking redressal.
KRERA’s order ensures that builders can no longer hide behind vague explanations—and that buyer voices carry legal force.
In a significant turn of events for residents of Agastya, a residential project in North Bengaluru, 21 aggrieved homebuyers have taken legal recourse against the developer, Ishtika Homes Pvt Ltd, citing unfulfilled promises of key amenities — the most prominent being a rooftop swimming pool and a non-functional sewage treatment plant (STP). The case, brought before the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA), has now resulted in a directive that could shape how builder-buyer conflicts are handled in the state going forward.
What Sparked the Dispute Between Homebuyers and the Builder?
The core of the dispute lies in unkept promises and incomplete amenities. According to the buyers, several crucial facilities—such as a rooftop swimming pool, functional STP, gym, intercom, yoga hall, and kids’ play area—were clearly mentioned in the project brochure and sale agreements but remain either incomplete or non-functional even after possession was handed over. For the 60-unit Agastya project, most units are now occupied, and the lack of promised infrastructure has left homeowners disillusioned.
What Did KRERA Say About the Missing Rooftop Swimming Pool?
KRERA found that although possession had been given, the rooftop swimming pool was never constructed. The developer cited “differing opinions among homebuyers” as the reason for the delay. However, KRERA took a firm stand and directed Ishtika Homes to hold a joint meeting of all allottees within 30 days. Based on the majority consensus, the builder must either:
- Construct the promised rooftop swimming pool, or
- Refund the amount collected for it
This directive aims to ensure that all buyers have a say in the final outcome while holding the developer accountable.
What About the Sewage Treatment Plant and Water Supply Issues?
Another major pain point for residents is poor water quality. Despite assurances of a BWSSB (Cauvery water) connection, the residents are still reliant on borewell water. The builder had collected deposits from buyers promising a BWSSB supply, but no timeline or visible progress has been communicated.
A water treatment plant was reportedly installed, but according to buyers, it is either defective or never worked. Residents have complained of recurring health issues, especially among children, due to the hard water, making this not just a contractual failure but a public health concern.
KRERA has taken note and rejected the builder’s claim that poor maintenance by residents caused these issues. Instead, it clarified that the onus of proving functionality lies with the builder, especially for common services promised in the project’s sanctioned plan.
How Did KRERA Address the Gym, Yoga Hall, and Other Amenities?
In its order, KRERA noted that some amenities such as the gym and yoga hall have been incorporated into a multi-purpose clubhouse. Since these were not explicitly mentioned as standalone facilities in the sale agreement, and a basic version has been provided, KRERA did not issue further directions on this matter.
However, the broader issue of incomplete amenities remains a major concern for the residents, especially given that these offerings influenced their decision to invest in the project.
Is the Builder Being Transparent About the STP and Power Backup?
The builder claimed the STP became non-functional due to poor upkeep but has since been repaired. However, no documentation or third-party validation has been submitted to back this claim.
To verify the status, KRERA has now ordered the builder to:
- Submit a third-party certified report from a qualified engineer or environmental consultant detailing the operational status of the STP and power backup systems.
This report is expected to provide clarity on whether the builder has genuinely addressed the issues or is simply deflecting responsibility.
What Did KRERA Say About the Residents’ Association?
An additional complaint from buyers was the delayed and questionable formation of the residents’ association. KRERA has now directed the builder to:
- Provide a written assurance within 10 days that the association’s registration will not override or interfere with ongoing grievances.
This measure ensures that the registration of the association doesn’t dilute the residents’ legal rights or nullify their complaints.
What’s Next for the Homebuyers and Ishtika Homes?
The outcome of the upcoming joint meeting and the third-party report on STP functionality will be crucial in determining the way forward. If the majority of residents opt for a refund instead of the rooftop pool, Ishtika Homes will be bound to comply. Similarly, the developer must now back its claims with hard evidence, not just statements.
KRERA’s proactive intervention has offered a much-needed mechanism for resolution and accountability in this case. However, this situation also sheds light on the wider issues plaguing real estate projects, where homebuyers often struggle to enforce terms promised at the time of sale.
Final Thoughts
The Agastya project controversy is a wake-up call for both builders and buyers. While developers must understand the legal weight of every commitment made in brochures and agreements, buyers must remain vigilant and united when seeking redressal.
KRERA’s order ensures that builders can no longer hide behind vague explanations—and that buyer voices carry legal force.
