In short (2026)
If a Bengaluru flat is being sold on the strength of extra floors or extra built-up area under Karnataka’s Premium FAR scheme, do not treat the approval as final comfort. The Supreme Court has not finally struck down the scheme, but it has made clear that Premium FAR should not be used, for now, to regularise unauthorised construction. For a buyer or lender, the practical question is not only whether the project has an approval letter. The question is whether the building was lawful before Premium FAR, whether the extra FAR was validly purchased or granted, and whether every clearance is expressly subject to the pending case.
What exactly is the risk if the flat has Premium FAR approval?
The risk is that the extra built-up area may be legally unstable if the approval is being used to cure an existing deviation instead of permitting future lawful development. Premium FAR is meant to allow additional floor area on payment of a premium under planning rules. It is not supposed to be a back-door amnesty for a building that already violated the sanctioned plan.
For a buyer, the distinction matters because title to the undivided share of land is only one part of the transaction. The flat also depends on the legality of the structure in which it sits. A sale deed for a flat in an unauthorised or irregularly regularised portion may still get registered, but that does not mean the flat is safe from municipal action, refusal of occupancy certificate, refusal of khata transfer, or later litigation.
For a lender, the risk is collateral quality. If the mortgaged flat depends on a disputed planning relaxation, the enforcement value of the security is weaker. A bank can have a registered mortgage over the borrower’s rights, but if the flat cannot be freely occupied, transferred, mutated, or sold without litigation, the legal scrutiny should not mark the file as clean merely because a project approval exists.
Does the Supreme Court order cancel all Premium FAR approvals in Karnataka?
No. The present position is more limited. The Court has issued notice in the challenge and indicated that the scheme should not be used to regularise unauthorised construction while the matter is pending. It has also indicated that interim clearances will remain subject to the final result of the case.
That means a buyer should avoid two extreme assumptions. The first wrong assumption is that every Premium FAR approval is void. The second wrong assumption is that every Premium FAR approval is safe because the High Court had earlier upheld the scheme. The correct working position is cautious: the approval may be usable, but only after checking whether it fits within the planning framework and whether it is not being used to validate a past violation.
This is why the diligence note should use conditional language. It should say whether the file shows a lawful base sanction, whether additional FAR was granted before construction of the relevant portion, and whether the purchaser is accepting the risk of the pending Supreme Court proceedings.
How do I know if Premium FAR is being used for new permission or to cover an old deviation?
Start with dates. The date of the original sanctioned plan, the date of the revised sanctioned plan, the date of the Premium FAR permission, the date of commencement certificate, and the date of construction progress must tell a coherent story.
If the building had already constructed the disputed extra area before Premium FAR permission was granted, that is a warning sign. If notices for deviation, demolition, compounding, or regularisation exist before the Premium FAR permission, the approval may be an attempt to cure a breach. If the revised plan was issued before the extra floors were constructed and there are no adverse municipal notices, the risk is lower, though not eliminated.
Ask for the architect’s certificate and the municipal file extract. Do not rely only on the brochure, RERA page, or the builder’s letter. The municipal file should show the base permissible FAR, the additional FAR sought, the premium paid, the road width relied on, the zoning basis, and the revised sanction. If any of these elements are missing, the approval is not self-explanatory.
Can RERA registration make the flat safe despite the Premium FAR issue?
No. RERA registration is useful, but it is not a substitute for title and planning due diligence. RERA looks at project registration disclosures, promoter obligations, timelines, and buyer-facing information. It does not automatically cure a defective title, an invalid building sanction, a land-use breach, or an unauthorised construction.
A RERA registration page can help you identify the sanctioned plans uploaded by the promoter, the number of approved units, the completion date, the landowner and promoter details, and whether approvals have been revised. But the buyer should still compare the RERA disclosures with the municipal sanction and the actual flat being sold.
A common problem is mismatch. The sale agreement may mention a flat number, floor, super built-up area, car park, terrace right, or tower that does not match the sanctioned plan or RERA inventory. When Premium FAR is involved, that mismatch becomes more serious because the additional area may be the very thing under legal scrutiny.
What should a bank’s legal team say in the title report?
The title report should separate ownership risk from approval risk. A file can have clear land title and still carry a building approval risk. The legal opinion should not collapse both into one sentence like “title is clear and marketable” without a qualification.
A safer structure is this:
- State whether the land title chain is clear based on the parent deeds, revenue records, encumbrance search and litigation search.
- State whether the project relies on Premium FAR or a revised sanction involving additional FAR.
- State whether the relevant flat falls within the originally sanctioned area or within the additional area.
- State whether any municipal deviation notice, demolition notice, compounding order, or regularisation order is found.
- State that approvals under the Premium FAR framework may be subject to the outcome of the pending Supreme Court challenge.
This allows the credit team to take a commercial decision with the correct legal risk in front of it. The lawyer’s job is not to predict the final Supreme Court result. The lawyer’s job is to identify whether the security depends on a contested planning permission.
What is the concrete check that settles the matter?
The concrete check is a plan-to-flat comparison using the municipal sanctioned plan file, the revised plan granting Premium FAR, and the actual flat schedule in the draft sale deed or allotment letter.
Obtain the sanctioned building plan and revised sanction from the competent planning or municipal authority for the project location. In Bengaluru, this may involve the relevant urban development or municipal authority record depending on the project area and the approval route. Also obtain the commencement certificate, occupancy certificate or partial occupancy certificate, Premium FAR payment proof, and any order or endorsement granting additional FAR.
Then read the records in this order:
- Identify the survey number, municipal number and project name in the land title documents.
- Match those identifiers with the sanctioned plan file.
- Check the originally approved floors, blocks, towers and built-up area.
- Check what changed in the revised sanction.
- Identify whether the flat being purchased sits in the extra FAR portion.
- Check whether the approval came before construction of that portion.
- Check whether the occupancy certificate covers that flat, tower and floor.
- Check whether the authority recorded any condition that approvals are subject to court orders.
If the flat does not appear in the sanctioned or revised plan, do not proceed on the basis of builder assurances. If the flat appears only in a later revised plan issued after construction, ask whether the file contains deviation proceedings or compounding records. If the occupancy certificate excludes the relevant floor or tower, the risk remains even if the sale deed can be registered.
What documents should the seller or builder provide before I pay advance?
Ask for the mother deed and title chain for the land, but do not stop there. In a Premium FAR case, the approval set is equally important. The seller or builder should provide the original sanctioned plan, all revised sanctioned plans, commencement certificate, Premium FAR permission or endorsement, proof of premium payment, zoning or road-width basis for the additional FAR, RERA registration page and uploaded approvals, completion certificate, occupancy certificate and any municipal correspondence on deviations.
If the seller is a resale owner, ask for the builder-buyer agreement, allotment letter, possession letter, sale deed, khata or property tax record, association handover documents and any no-dues certificate. Resale sellers often do not have the full approval file. That does not make the risk disappear. It only means the buyer must obtain certified copies or inspected copies from the authority or insist that the seller procures them before advance.
The draft sale deed should also be checked carefully. It should not describe the flat in a way that exceeds the sanctioned plan. It should not hide the fact that the building depends on revised approvals. If the agreement says the buyer has verified all approvals, that clause can weaken the buyer’s position later.
Should I avoid every project that uses Premium FAR?
Not necessarily. Premium FAR is a planning tool, and a project may have used it lawfully. The red flag is not the mere phrase “Premium FAR”. The red flag is the absence of a clean sequence of approvals, construction and occupancy.
A lower-risk case looks like this: the land title is clear, the base plan was sanctioned, the builder applied for additional FAR, the authority granted it before the relevant construction, the premium was paid, the revised plan reflects the flat, the occupancy certificate covers the relevant tower and floor, and there are no pending deviation notices. Even then, because the broader scheme is under challenge, the legal opinion should mention the pending litigation risk.
A higher-risk case looks like this: extra floors already exist, the builder later obtains or seeks Premium FAR to bring them within limits, buyers are asked to accept possession before an occupancy certificate, the RERA inventory differs from the plan, or the authority has issued notices for unauthorised construction. In that case, the buyer should either walk away or insist on resolution before payment.
What can quietly go wrong after registration?
Registration can happen even when planning risk exists. The Sub-Registrar usually does not conduct a full planning legality review. That is why buyers discover the problem later, after paying stamp duty and taking a loan.
The first problem is occupancy. If the occupancy certificate is delayed, partial, conditional, or missing, the buyer may struggle with lawful occupation, utilities, association handover and resale. The second problem is khata or municipal transfer. Local authorities may refuse or delay records if the flat or building portion is not recognised as lawful. The third problem is enforcement. If the authority later proceeds against unauthorised portions, individual buyers may be drawn into litigation even though the deviation was created by the developer.
The fourth problem is mortgage enforcement. If the borrower defaults, the bank may find that auction buyers discount the property because of the pending planning dispute. A registered mortgage over a disputed unit is still a mortgage, but the market value and enforceability can be impaired.
What should I put in the agreement if I still want to buy?
If you proceed, the agreement should not rely on general warranties alone. It should specifically say that the seller or promoter represents that the flat, floor, tower, parking and common area entitlement are covered by valid sanctioned plans and occupancy approvals, including any Premium FAR permission relied on. It should require delivery of copies of the approval documents before final payment.
The agreement should also allocate risk. If any approval is later withdrawn because the seller or promoter used Premium FAR to regularise an unauthorised portion, the buyer should have a refund, indemnity and cancellation mechanism. If the transaction is a resale, the seller may resist giving broad warranties about the developer’s acts. In that case, the buyer should reduce the risk through document verification rather than relying on a resale seller’s promise.
For a financed purchase, the disbursement condition should be tied to the approval set. The bank should not disburse only because the sale deed is ready. It should insist on the sanctioned plan, revised plan, occupancy certificate and legal opinion qualification being cleared at the credit level.
Frequently asked questions
Is Premium FAR the same as Akrama-Sakrama?
No. Premium FAR is presented as a planning mechanism for extra permissible floor area on payment of a premium. Akrama-Sakrama is associated with regularisation of unauthorised constructions. The current risk is that Premium FAR should not be used in practice as a substitute regularisation route.
Can I get a home loan for a flat approved under Premium FAR?
You may be able to get a loan, but the lender should check whether the flat is covered by a valid sanctioned plan, revised approval and occupancy certificate. If the flat falls in an area that appears to have been constructed first and approved later, the bank may qualify, reduce or reject the security.
Does a registered sale deed protect me if the building approval is later challenged?
A registered sale deed proves the transfer between seller and buyer, but it does not cure an unlawful building approval or unauthorised construction. If the flat itself depends on a defective approval, you may still face municipal, resale, occupancy or lending problems.
What is the single most important document to check?
The most important check is not one document but a comparison between the sanctioned plan, the revised Premium FAR approval and the exact flat described in your sale papers. If the flat, floor or tower is missing from that approval trail, the transaction is not safe to clear.
Should I wait for the final Supreme Court decision before buying?
If the flat clearly depends on disputed regularisation of an unauthorised portion, waiting is safer. If the project has a clean approval sequence and a valid occupancy certificate, you may proceed only after your lawyer records the pending litigation risk and you are comfortable with it.