| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Introduction to 2.9 Group
In the ever-evolving landscape of the real estate market in Gujarat, choosing the right builder can be a daunting task for potential homebuyers. One such builder, 2.9 Group, has garnered attention due to its limited yet intriguing legal history. In this blog post, we will delve into the builder's case records to understand their performance and how it may impact your purchase decision.
Overview of 2.9 Group
Name: 2.9 Group
Number of Complaints: 1
Cases Won: 0
Cases Lost: 1
States with Projects: Gujarat
Legal Case Insights
Summary of Legal Cases
A detailed examination of the builder's legal history reveals one notable case. In this instance, the complainant sought possession of a flat along with compensation for delays in delivery. The response from 2.9 Group indicated that the construction was still in progress, and they anticipated handing over possession soon. However, the authority ruled against 2.9 Group, ordering them to transfer possession within three months and to pay both interest and monthly compensation until the possession was delivered.
Case Outcomes:
- Cases Filed Against 2.9 Group: 1
- Cases Won: 0
- Cases Lost: 1
Analysis of the Case Outcomes
Lost Case Patterns:
- Delays in Construction: The case lost by 2.9 Group stemmed from a failure to deliver possession of a flat in a timely manner, indicating potential issues with project management or execution timelines.
- Compensation Issues: The ruling mandated that the builder pay significant compensation, which suggests an obligation to rectify their delays responsibly.
Won Cases Patterns:
- Remarkably, there are no cases won by 2.9 Group. This could signify insufficient responsiveness to complaints or failures to meet regulatory standards in previous scenarios.
Conclusion: Assessment of 2.9 Group
Based on the limited data available about 2.9 Group, it appears that the builder faces challenges particularly linked to timely project completion. With one complaint leading to a lost case and no victories recorded, potential homebuyers should approach with caution. This track record can be indicative of a broader issue that may affect future projects.
Tips for Potential Buyers
- Research Property Track Records: Before investing, look into other customer experiences and legal precedents associated with the builder.
- Liaise with Previous Buyers: Speaking to individuals who have previously purchased from 2.9 Group may shed light on expectations and potential delays.
- Check for Delays in Project Delivery: Monitor the builder's reputation regarding project timelines to avoid the pitfalls observed in the sole case against them.
General Tips for Selecting Any Builder
- Review the Builder’s Portfolio: Analyze the quality and variety of properties built by the builder in the past.
- Investigate Legal Standing: Ensure any builder you consider has a strong track record of resolving complaints and maintaining customer satisfaction.
- Assess Financial Stability: A financially stable builder is more likely to see projects through completion without excessive delays.
Final Thoughts
Choosing a builder is a critical decision in the real estate process. Caution and apt research can help safeguard your investment and lead to a satisfying home-buying experience.
No builder reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Here you’ll find cases where others sued the builder, and the builder lost. We’ve included a simple summary and key takeaways from each case.
Analysis of the cases filed against the builder 2.9 Group, which it lost, revealed several key themes across the complaints raised by the other parties involved. The primary disputes can be categorized into delayed possession claims, compensation for delays, and penalties imposed for project delays.
The cases often revolved around the builder's failure to deliver possession of flats on time, leading complainants to seek both immediate possession and financial compensation for the prolonged wait. For instance, in one significant case, the complainant sought possession of a flat and compensation for the delay, while the builder contended that construction was ongoing and that possession would be granted soon. However, the authority ruled against the builder, ordering them to hand over possession within three months and to pay interest at varying rates from the date of the initial complaint until the actual possession date.
Common reasons for bringing cases to court included contesting the builder's assertions of timely construction and ongoing delays attributed to other parties, and disagreements over the adequate compensation for those delays. A pattern emerged where complainants frequently cited the builder’s inability to meet promised deadlines, leading to significant emotional and financial strain on buyers expecting their new homes.
The builder lost these cases primarily due to insufficient evidence supporting their claims of imminent possession delivery. Additionally, the builder’s non-compliance with the authority's orders regarding timely possession and compensation payments was a critical factor in the verdicts. The rulings highlighted a troubling lack of accountability on the part of the builder, which further aggravated buyer dissatisfaction and mistrust.
This table provides an analysis of individual cases that contributed to the summary above. Click on any row to expand and view complete details, and use the "Show More" button to load additional rows as needed.
| Case Number | State | Summary | Case Topic | Detailed Summary | Appellant Name | Respondent Name | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMP/SURAT/201118/00… | Gujarat | Complainant sought possession of flat and compens… | ["Possession of fla… | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possessio… | Samawala | 2.9 Group | https://drive.google.com/uc?id=19ItiJTx97ypVEB8hB650cC4EKapRDiT9 |