Maintenance Before Possession or OC: What the Builder Can Charge at Each Stage

Reviewed on: 2026-06-12.

Start with the stage you are in. The table below is the usual position under standard builder-buyer agreements and RERA; your own agreement clause and state rules decide the fine print.

Three different demands hide inside one builder invoice, and they have different rules:

• Monthly maintenance pays for running services. It is tied to lawful possession or a valid offer of possession.
• Corpus or IFMS is a one-time reserve belonging to the future association, not income of the builder.
• Taxes and outgoings for the period before transfer are the promoter's own liability under Section 11(4)(g) of RERA; “property tax recovery” for pre-possession years deserves close scrutiny.

A Chennai buyer received a possession-offer letter demanding Rs 2.92 lakh: 24 months advance maintenance at Rs 4.50 per sq ft on a 1,400 sq ft flat (Rs 1.51 lakh), a corpus of Rs 75 per sq ft (Rs 1.05 lakh), and Rs 36,000 as “pro-rata property tax”. The letter was dated March; the CMDA records showed no completion certificate yet. Taken apart: the maintenance demand fails because there was no lawful offer without the certificate; the corpus may be contractually due at possession, but only at actual, valid possession; and the pre-possession “property tax” line was the builder's own Section 11(4)(g) liability dressed up as a buyer charge. The buyer's written reply asking for the certificate, the agreement clause for each line, and an itemised period cut the demand to the corpus alone, payable at genuine handover.

Tamil Nadu buyers should ask for the completion certificate position from CMDA or the local body; in states issuing occupancy certificates, ask for the OC. Either way, verify with the authority, not the builder's covering letter.

1. Read your agreement first. Find three clauses: the maintenance rate and start trigger, the corpus amount and timing, and the definition of “offer of possession”. Quote clause numbers in every reply.
2. Demand the paperwork in writing: the OC or completion certificate, the formal possession letter, and an itemised breakup of the demand by head, rate and period. Email plus registered post.
3. Verify the certificate independently with the municipal corporation or planning authority. If the builder will not even share the copy, that is its own dispute: getting the OC copy.
4. Dispute the unlawful heads, not the whole invoice. A reply that concedes the corpus but contests pre-OC maintenance reads as reasonable before any forum.
5. If you must pay to get the keys, pay under protest. Bank transfer only, with a written line that payment is made under protest and without prejudice to your right to dispute and recover it. Keep the receipt.
6. Escalate to your state RERA if the demand stands: seek a corrected demand, refund of amounts paid under protest, and lawful possession with the certificate. Where the builder is also blocking handover despite holding the OC, see builder has OC but refuses possession.

Maintenance charges attract 18 percent GST where the monthly charge per flat exceeds Rs 7,500 (and the supplier crosses the turnover threshold). Two checks: the invoice must show the builder's or agency's GSTIN if GST is billed, and GST cannot be charged on a corpus deposit that is a returnable reserve rather than a service. Ask for a tax invoice, not a “demand letter”, before paying anything with GST added.

The builder is outside RTI, but the facts that decide this dispute are public records:

• Municipal corporation or planning authority: whether an OC or completion certificate exists for your block, its date, and the status of any pending application. A builder claiming “OC applied, coming next month” is tested by one RTI.
• State RERA: the project's declared completion date and certificates uploaded on the project page.
• Local body tax department: whether the property has been assessed and who has paid tax for the period the builder bills you.

File through RTI online or your state RTI portal. Frame questions around records, not grievances, or the PIO will reject them, see why RTI gets rejected.

Only if your agreement genuinely provides it and the offer was valid, meaning the certificate existed and the flat was ready. A deemed date in a letter cannot override the absence of an OC.

Advance collection is common and usually contractual, not illegal in itself. The questions are whether the trigger date is lawful and whether the unspent advance will be accounted to the association later, see maintenance transfer to the society.

Record that condition in writing, pay disputed amounts under protest if you need the keys, and raise the coercion squarely in your RERA complaint. Conditioning lawful handover on a contested charge is a standard RERA grievance.

Usually not, if your agreement provides for it at possession. What you can demand is a receipt, the fund's destination, and later its transfer with interest to the association.

That clause typically binds you only where the offer is valid, certificate in place and unit complete. If either is missing, contest the start date in writing with the clause quoted.

No. Whatever you pay now, control must pass once the association takes over, and the builder must account for collections at that point.

• Builder changed the payment schedule after booking
• Maintenance transfer from builder to society
• Corpus and accounts handover
• Builder refuses cancellation refund
• All practical guides

Download the pre-possession maintenance demand checklist (PDF).