Lotus Orchard
K-RERA · the public record
Zenith
· Lotus Landmarks (I)
Project Review · example purchase
Spending a few crores on a unit? ₹4,999 to check what you’re buying.
Check what the plans put beside your unit, below it and in front of it. The view, nearby buildings and shared facilities can change what you are buying.
See the report before you buy
Avoid bad decisions, only go for the best units.
Read the complete sample: unit choices, layout illustrations, important risks and questions for the builder. Its findings concern the named sample, not this project.
Read the Project Review sample ↗From another project
See the report before you buy.
A published sample shows the level of detail, source illustrations and buyer reasoning. Its findings belong to that project.
Read a sample report ↗84registered unitsK-RERA registration · read 16 Jul 2026
Free project details
Registration read 16 Jul 2026Registered units and project size
Filed categories, unchanged · K-RERA registration · read 16 Jul 2026
The whole registration
0.8registered acres
100.5registered units per acre
The average covers the registered land and all registered unit types. It does not describe the space, outlook or surroundings of an individual unit.
RERA details for Zenith
K-RERA · PRM/KA/RERA/1249/447/PR/171125/000482
Project facts and comparisons
On the register
Land area3,384 sq m (0.8 acres)
Homes registered84
Tower/wing entries1
In context
Density100.5 homes per acre
Density in context70th percentile of 4913 projects in this register (median 82)
Source: K-RERA. Each comparison names the group of projects used.
Project areas, parking and inventory
Project areas and parking
RERA filing| Disclosure | Official value | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Registered units | 84 | Total inventory registered with K-RERA. |
| Registered land area | 3,384 sqm | The land area attached to this K-RERA registration. |
| Sanctioned FAR/FSI | 2.3 | Higher FAR generally means a denser vertical build, subject to site layout and open-space design. |
| Registered tower/wing entries | 1 | Official tower/wing count in the K-RERA detail page. |
| Parking total (reconciled) | 84 | Separate filed counts; these categories may overlap and are not added together. |
| Open-parking field | 0 | Separate filed counts; these categories may overlap and are not added together. |
| Garage field | 0 | Separate filed counts; these categories may overlap and are not added together. |
| Project start date | 01-07-2013 |
Official inventory & towers
RERA filingK-RERA registration tables showing the project mix and tower/wing scale. Use this to sanity-check sales claims such as "only large homes", "low density", or "plenty of parking" against the filed inventory.
Registered tower / wing summary
| Tower/wing | Floors | Units | Parking | Height |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zenith | 12 | 84 | 84 | - |
Official unit register
RERA filingK-RERA detail-page flat rows: exact unit numbers, official carpet area, UDS, and parking lots. 84 official flat/unit rows, matching the 84 registered units disclosed above. Use this as a checklist against the specific flat number in your cost sheet and draft agreement.
By unit type
| Unit type | Rows | Carpet area | UDS | Parking lots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2BHK | 51 | 739.0-1,373.0 sqft | 2.0-85.0 sqft | 51 |
| 3BHK | 33 | 793.0-1,581.0 sqft | 3.0-81.0 sqft | 33 |
By tower / wing
| Tower/wing | Rows | Carpet area | UDS | Parking lots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zenith | 84 | 739.0-1,581.0 sqft | 2.0-85.0 sqft | 84 |
Show sample official unit rows
| Unit | Tower | Floor | Type | Carpet | UDS | Parking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 101 | Zenith | 1 | 2BHK | 926.0 sqft | 2.0 sqft | 1 |
| 102 | Zenith | 1 | 3BHK | 1,099.0 sqft | 3.0 sqft | 1 |
| 103 | Zenith | 1 | 2BHK | 990.0 sqft | 4.0 sqft | 1 |
| 104 | Zenith | 1 | 2BHK | 776.0 sqft | 5.0 sqft | 1 |
| 105 | Zenith | 1 | 2BHK | 752.0 sqft | 6.0 sqft | 1 |
| 106 | Zenith | 1 | 2BHK | 739.0 sqft | 7.0 sqft | 1 |
Legal, Approvals & Project Team
Litigation & compliance
RERA filingLitigation status was not supplied in the captured record. This is not confirmation that there are no cases.
All 14 standard compliance document slots have usable uploaded filings.
✓ Completion certificate (OC) is on file.
Approval documents
Electricity (BESCOM/ESCOM)Bundled document listed: All NOCs from Authority
Water & sewage (BWSSB/KWSSB)Bundled document listed: All NOCs from Authority
Fire NOCBundled document listed: All NOCs from Authority
Pollution control (KSPCB)Bundled document listed: All NOCs from Authority
Environmental clearanceBundled document listed: All NOCs from Authority
Airport Authority height clearanceBundled document listed: All NOCs from Authority
A listed file does not confirm approval. An unlisted file does not establish that an approval is missing or required. Check the documents and their applicability before relying on them.
K-RERA complaint orders (7 complaints against a project of this name on K-RERA's orders register)
| Parties | Relief sought | Disposal | Order date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vishweshwar S Uppin vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Completion of Zenith Bldg with promised amenities | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
| Siddalingeshwar S Sangoli vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Completion of Zenith Building and promised Ameniti | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
| Rajaram V Patil vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Completion of Zenith Building and Proposed Ameniti | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
| Ashok S Yargattiimath vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Completion of Zenith Building and promised ameniti | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
| Satish G Ganachari vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Completion of Zenith Building and Promised Ameniti | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
| Jyothi J Iliger vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Completion of Zenith Building & Promised amenities | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
| Nilesh G Ranadive vs Lotus Landmarks (I) Pvt Ltd | Relief prayed for completion of the pending amenities and infrastructure and compensation for delay in completion of the amenities and infrastructure. | AUTHORITY | 25/02/2026 |
⚠ Matched by PROJECT NAME (the orders register carries no registration number) — confirm the respondent above is this project's builder before relying on it.
Complaints on this project's K-RERA page (2 complaints listed against this promoter)
| Complaint | Subject (as filed) | Project | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| CMP/190211/0002094 11-02-2019 | Lotus RVP City Project is not developed and no refund provided | Lotus RVP City (another project by this promoter) | DISPOSED AO |
| CMP/210406/0007865 06-04-2021 | Amenities & NOCs not obtained | Zenith | DISPOSED AUTHORITY FULLBENCH |
Listed on the project's own K-RERA detail page (registration-exact source). Rows on the promoter's other projects are track-record context — read the subject text, it is the complainant's own filed wording.
Project team & certifications
RERA filingK-RERA names 3 project professional/vendor rows across Architect, Contractor, Structural engineer. Use this to cross-check whose certificates, drawings, and contractor commitments support the filing; final reliance still belongs with your lawyer/technical reviewer.
| Role | Name | Registration / licence | Since | Locality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Architect | Archana Patil | - | 2009 | Pushparang Building, Hidnwadi Belgaum |
| Contractor | jaddu Manda | - | 2010 | Belgaum, Belgaum |
| Structural engineer | Vijay Khilare | - | - | - |
Builder track record
RERA filingLotus Landmarks has 3 other K-RERA-registered projects in our records. 0 are past their declared completion deadline with no completion certificate recorded — but because K-RERA publishes OCs inconsistently, a project that has actually been finished and handed over still shows up this way, so this overstates real delays, especially for a high-volume established builder. That is a lower delayed rate than the K-RERA average across Bengaluru on the same measure.
Read this as a list to spot-check for a pattern of genuinely stalled projects, not as a delay rate — pull up a few of the builder’s other K-RERA registrations and check whether they’ve actually been delivered.
Financials & Construction Progress
Financial disclosures
RERA filingNo quarterly financial disclosures on record — expected for a project that's already received its completion certificate and stopped filing quarterly updates after handover.
Declared construction cost ÷ registered units averages to ₹27.4 lakhs per unit — the developer's own declared construction/development cost, not a unit agreement or asking price. This project-cost average cannot establish whether a quoted unit price is fair. Compare the exact unit, area basis, date and included charges in any price evidence.
RERA 70% project account is on file: HDFC Belgaum (IFSC HDFC0001247, a/c …0459). RERA requires 70% of buyer collections to sit in this separate, project-specific account, drawn only against certified construction milestones — confirm your payments are made to THIS account (not a general builder account) and that it appears on your allotment letter.
Construction photo filings
RERA filingK-RERA has 1 project-photo upload.
These are developer-uploaded progress photos in the official document catalog. We do not treat them as proof of current site condition; use them as a prompt to ask for newer dated photos or a site visit. Individual filings are listed in the document catalog below.
Location & Connectivity
The nearest of the listed job hubs is about 8 km in a straight line from the mapped location. Road distance and travel time will differ.
| Landmark | Straight-line |
|---|---|
| MG Road / city centre | 4 km |
| Bellandur–Marathahalli belt | 8 km |
| Outer Ring Road / Manyata | 11 km |
| Electronic City | 12 km |
| Whitefield IT hub | 15 km |
| Kempegowda Int'l Airport | 30 km |
Straight-line distances from the geocoded project locality (the RERA address is an area, not a door) — directional, not door-to-door drive times. Check the actual road route, the nearest metro station and daily-need shops/schools/hospitals on a site visit.