A-SURTI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED
- No of Complaints: 12
- States (Active in): Maharashtra
| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Understanding A-Surti Developers: A Case Study in Real Estate Challenges
In the dynamic world of real estate, choosing the right builder can significantly impact your investment and home-buying experience. Today, we take a closer look at A-Surti Developers Private Limited, a builder with a notable presence in Maharashtra. This analysis will delve into the complaints against the builder, legal outcomes, and key takeaways for potential buyers.
Overview of A-Surti Developers Private Limited
A-Surti Developers Private Limited has been embroiled in a series of complaints, totaling 12, all of which resulted in cases against them being lost. Notably, the builder has won no cases to date. This trend raises important questions about the builder's reliability and the quality of their projects in the Maharashtra region.
Legal Case Details
The nature of the legal challenges faced by A-Surti Developers primarily revolves around agreements for sale. Customers have consistently claimed that their agreements were valid, legal, and binding, seeking possession of flats as promised.
On the other hand, A-Surti developers argued that these agreements had been cancelled prior to the advent of the Real Estate Regulation Act (RERA), asserting that no cause of action existed at the outset of the Act. Despite this defense, the outcomes of these cases have consistently resulted in losses for the builder, as the legal proceedings have mandated that their cases be reopened and reconsidered by the MahaRERA chairman.
Analysis of Patterns and Trends
Common Factors in Lost Cases
The analysis of A-Surti Developers' lost cases reveals several recurring elements:
- Cancellation of Agreements: The primary defense leveraged by the builder was the cancellation of agreements before the implementation of RERA. This indicates a systematic issue with the way contracts were managed and executed.
- Customer Discontent: The repeated claims from appellants about possession and valid agreements suggest a pattern of unmet customer expectations and a failure to deliver on promised commitments.
Common Factors in Cases Filed
Interestingly, while the builder has not won any cases, it is noteworthy that the nature of the claims made by the appellants has remained similar across disputes. Each claim involved:
- Demand for Possession of Flats: The consistent demand highlights a significant oversight or failure in the builder's project management and customer service approach, resulting in a widespread sentiment of dissatisfaction among buyers.
Conclusion: A Cautious Outlook for Potential Buyers
In light of the data provided, A-Surti Developers Private Limited presents a concerning profile for potential buyers. With 12 complaints leading to legal losses and zero victories, the builder's reliability is questionable. Buyers should consider this track record carefully and conduct thorough research before entering into any agreements.
Tips for Potential Buyers
- Due Diligence: Always perform due diligence on builders before making decisions. Investigate their reputation, track record, and customer reviews.
- Seek Legal Advice: If considering a purchase, consult with a legal expert familiar with real estate transactions to ensure agreements are fair and binding.
- Verify Agreements: Ensure that all agreements are clear, lawful, and compliant with current regulations, such as RERA.
General Tips for Selecting Builders
- Scrutinize Reviews: Check multiple platforms for customer feedback to get an overall picture of the builder's reputation.
- Visit Completed Projects: If possible, visit existing projects to evaluate construction quality and material used.
- Clarify Payment Terms: Ensure all payment terms, timelines, and conditions are clearly defined in the agreement to avoid future disputes.
Navigating the home-buying terrain can be daunting; however, understanding the builder’s background and legal history can provide essential insights that lead to informed decisions.
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 A-Surti Developers Private Limited, where the builder lost, revealed several key themes across the complaints raised by the appellants.
The primary disputes revolve around the Validity of Sale Agreements, with multiple appellants claiming that their agreements for sale were valid, legal, subsisting, and binding on the respondent. They sought specific performance of these agreements and desired possession of the flats. This indicates a significant area of contention where buyers felt their contractual rights were not being honored.
Another recurring theme is the builder's claim of Cancellation of Agreements Prior to RER Act. In defense, the builder consistently argued that the agreements for sale were canceled before the commencement of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RER Act), asserting that there was no cause of action remaining when the Act came into force. This defense suggests an attempt by the builder to circumvent the obligations imposed by the RER Act by canceling agreements before its enactment.
The Specific Performance and Possession Claims theme encapsulates the core demand from the appellants—that the builder should adhere to the terms of the agreements and deliver possession of the promised flats. The fact that the builder faced multiple lawsuits on this basis highlights a failure to meet contractual obligations, leading to a loss of trust among buyers.
Common reasons for bringing these cases to court include the appellants' desire to enforce their rights under the agreements and to obtain the promised property. The builder’s repeated defense regarding the cancellation of agreements before the RER Act suggests a pattern where the builder may have been attempting to avoid commitments by leveraging legal technicalities.
The builder lost these cases primarily due to the inadequacy of their defenses. The consistent remand of cases by the appellate authority back to MahaRERA for fresh consideration indicates that the builder's claims of cancellation prior to the RER Act were not accepted as valid grounds to override the contractual obligations. Moreover, the repeated failure to specifically perform agreements and hand over possession points to an systemic issue within the builder's operations, possibly related to project delays or financial mismanagement, which are common factors in such disputes.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATO06/10421 | Maharashtra | The appeals were partly allowed, and the impugned… | ["Real Estate", "Re… | {"appellant_claim": "The appellants claimed that … | Aditi Anand Patil | A- Surti Developers… | https://drive.google.com/uc?id=19MRWfsYuMmUVNJLGdqY0EyqGkCz7pZ4q |