By S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors · Published 16 October 2026 · Informational content, not legal advice: see our disclaimer
A homebuyer evaluating an under-construction project usually checks whether it is registered with the state's RERA authority and stops there, treating registration as a one-time box ticked. Registration is not permanent; it is tied to the completion timeline the promoter declared at the outset, and when that timeline runs out without the project being finished, the promoter has to apply for an extension, which the authority can grant only within strict limits. A buyer who does not track whether a project's registration has actually been extended, or has instead lapsed, is relying on a status that may no longer legally exist.
The West Bengal Real Estate Appellate Tribunal's ruling in the Essense project matter, reported in November 2025, has brought renewed attention to exactly how far an extension can go under Section 6 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, holding that extensions beyond one year are not permitted even where delays were caused by events outside the promoter's control. This guide explains how Section 6 actually works, what the tribunal decided, and what both homebuyers and promoters should take from it.
What Section 6 actually allows
Section 6 of the RERA Act allows the regulatory authority to extend a project's registration, on application by the promoter, where the project cannot be completed within the originally declared timeline due to force majeure, meaning events such as war, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or other calamity affecting the project's regular development. The provision contemplates genuinely exceptional, unforeseen circumstances, not ordinary business delays such as funding shortfalls, contractor disputes, or routine approval delays that a promoter should reasonably have anticipated and built into its original timeline.
The extension that can be granted under this force majeure route is capped at one year in aggregate, a reading the Bombay High Court confirmed as far back as 2018 when it upheld the constitutional validity of the RERA Act and described the Authority's power in force majeure cases as limited to extending registration by up to one year, while separately holding that the Authority could, in exceptional and genuinely compelling circumstances, consider continuing a project's registration beyond that on a case-by-case basis rather than through a blanket extension. This one-year ceiling is the detail many promoters and even some regulatory authorities have treated loosely in practice, approving successive extensions that collectively exceed it.
The Essense case and what the tribunal actually decided
In the matter involving the Essense project, developed by Periwal Constructions LLP, the promoter had already received an extension and then sought a further one, from March 2025 to December 2026, citing the Covid-19 pandemic and ongoing litigation as grounds, including an earlier construction stoppage directed by the Howrah Municipal Corporation. The West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority approved this further extension, but a project allottee objected, arguing that the cumulative extension period being granted went well beyond what Section 6 permits.
The West Bengal Real Estate Appellate Tribunal agreed with the allottee, holding that the first limb of Section 6 allows extension in genuinely exceptional situations without itself specifying a fixed outer limit, but that the provision read as a whole caps the actual extension period at one year, and it accordingly modified the state authority's order, cutting the extended registration back to end on 31 March 2026 instead of the longer period the authority had approved. This is an appellate tribunal ruling specific to West Bengal, not a Supreme Court or High Court judgment, but it directly addresses a question regulatory authorities across states have handled inconsistently.
What happens when registration actually lapses
Once a project's registration lapses without a valid extension in place, the promoter loses the legal basis to continue marketing, booking, or accepting payments for units in that project, and critically, a promoter whose registration has lapsed does not have the right to hand over possession or execute a registered conveyance deed for flats in an incomplete project, since the registration is what legally anchors the promoter's authority to complete and deliver the development under RERA's framework. Authorities in practice have treated a lapsed project as requiring either a validly approved extension or a fresh registration process before the promoter can lawfully proceed.
For a homebuyer, this is not a mere technicality. A unit purchased or a conveyance deed executed during a period when the project's registration had actually lapsed, even if nobody noticed at the time, creates a cloud over the transaction's validity that can surface later, during resale, during a dispute, or when the buyer tries to get a loan against the property. Checking the actual, current registration status on the state RERA authority's website, not relying on what a broker or the promoter's sales office states, is the only reliable way to confirm this before committing funds.
Why Section 18 remains the more important remedy for most buyers
Even where an extension is validly granted and registration stays current, a buyer whose unit is delayed beyond the promised date retains an independent right under Section 18 of the Act to seek a refund with interest, or to continue with the project and claim interest for the period of delay, regardless of whether the promoter's registration is technically still in force. An extension of registration does not by itself defeat or displace a buyer's Section 18 claim for compensation; the two operate on separate tracks, one governing the promoter's authority to continue developing the project, the other governing the buyer's individual remedy for delay.
A buyer who learns that the project's registration has been extended, or worse, has lapsed and later been revived, should treat this as a trigger to review their own Section 18 position rather than assuming the registration status resolves their own delay claim one way or the other. Filing a complaint before the state Real Estate Regulatory Authority is the usual first step, and it does not require waiting for the registration question to be separately sorted out.
Checking a project's registration status before you buy or pay further instalments
Every state RERA authority maintains a public, searchable register of projects, showing the registration number, the originally declared completion date, and any extensions actually granted, along with the dates those extensions cover. A prospective buyer should pull this record directly rather than relying on the registration certificate the promoter displays at the sales office, since that certificate may not reflect a subsequent extension, lapse, or modification made after the original registration was issued.
A buyer already invested in a project nearing its declared completion date, where no extension appears on the authority's record and construction is visibly behind schedule, should raise this directly with the authority rather than waiting for the promoter to regularise the position voluntarily, since an unregistered or lapsed project continuing to accept instalment payments from buyers is itself a compliance violation the authority is meant to act on.
What promoters should take from the Essense ruling
Promoters relying on force majeure grounds, particularly the lingering effects of the Covid-19 pandemic years after the event itself, should recognise that tribunals are increasingly unwilling to treat these as justifying indefinite or repeated extensions stacking well past the one-year cap the West Bengal tribunal has now read into Section 6. A promoter genuinely unable to complete within even an extended timeline should consider whether a fresh registration, with a realistic revised timeline properly disclosed to existing and prospective buyers, is a more defensible path than stacking successive extension applications that an appellate authority may later cut down.
Developers operating across multiple states should also note that regulatory practice on this point has not been uniform, and what one state authority approved without objection, a tribunal in another state, or even an allottee within the same state, may later successfully challenge. Building internal compliance around the one-year aggregate cap, rather than around what a particular authority happened to approve in the past, is the safer position going forward.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a RERA project's registration be extended more than once?
An authority can consider more than one extension application, but the West Bengal Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has held that the total extension period under Section 6, across all such applications, cannot exceed one year in aggregate, even where multiple force majeure grounds are cited.
What happens to my flat purchase if the project's RERA registration has lapsed?
A promoter whose registration has lapsed loses the legal basis to continue marketing the project or executing conveyance deeds for an incomplete development. Confirm the current registration status directly on the state RERA authority's website before making further payments or proceeding with a registration.
Does an extension of the project's registration affect my right to claim a refund for delay?
No. Your right under Section 18 to seek a refund with interest, or to continue and claim interest for delay, operates independently of whether the project's registration has been extended. Registration status and your individual delay claim are separate questions.
Where can I check whether a project's registration is still valid?
On the relevant state Real Estate Regulatory Authority's public website, which maintains a searchable register showing the registration number, original completion date, and details of any extension actually granted. Do not rely solely on the certificate displayed at a promoter's sales office.
References & Further Reading
The provisions and rulings below were relied on for this guide. The position can change with amendments and later decisions, so check the current text and the latest case law before acting on any of it.
- Section 6, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (extension of registration, one-year cap on force majeure extension)
- Section 18, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (return of amount and compensation)
- Bombay High Court, 2018 (constitutional validity of RERA Act; one-year cap on force majeure extension of registration)
- West Bengal Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Essense project registration extension matter, reported November 2025