A.R. INFRASTRUCTURE BIOLOGY
- No of Complaints: 1
- States (Active in): Madhya Pradesh
| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Understanding A.R. Infrastructure Biology: Insights and Buyer Tips
A.R. Infrastructure Biology is a builder primarily operating in Madhya Pradesh, but their reputation has come under scrutiny due to a recent legal matter involving complaint cases. In this blog post, we will delve into the specifics of this case, analyze patterns in the builder's legal history, and provide essential advice for potential buyers.
Legal Case Overview
A.R. Infrastructure Biology has encountered a limited number of legal complaints, with a total of 1 complaint filed against them. Unfortunately for potential buyers, this solitary complaint resulted in a loss for the builder, indicating a potential risk for future clients.
Details of the Case: A case summary reveals:
- Appellant Claim: The applicant claimed to have paid the full amount for a plot but asserted that possession was never provided, nor was the necessary development work completed.
- Respondent Claim: In contrast, the builder contended that the project had lapsed and the development work was therefore unfinished.
- Final Verdict: The authority ruled in favor of the complaint, instructing A.R. Infrastructure Biology to provide possession of the plot within three months whilst also requiring payment of the remaining amount during the transfer letter registration.
This situation sheds light on significant patterns that buyers should be aware of.
Patterns and Common Factors
Cases Lost:The single case lost by A.R. Infrastructure Biology indicates issues with failure to deliver on commitments, particularly related to project completion and provision of possession. The fact that a full payment was made but no delivery of the plot occurred raises red flags about the builder's reliability and capacity to fulfill agreements.
Cases Won:While there are no cases won in favor of A.R. Infrastructure Biology recorded, the single case that did proceed to a verdict ultimately favored the appellant (the opposing party). This lack of successful defenses reflects a concerning aspect for potential buyers—there is presently no demonstrated capability of the builder to successfully contest legal claims.
Conclusion and Buyer Assessment
A.R. Infrastructure Biology's legal history paints a picture of a builder with potential operational deficiencies that could significantly impact purchasers' experiences. With only one complaint on record—yet a loss in the associated case—investors should approach with caution.
Tips for Potential Buyers:
- Conduct Thorough Research: Before engaging with A.R. Infrastructure Biology, potential buyers should conduct extensive research on the builder's projects and any history of non-compliance or disputes.
- Request Transparent Documentation: Ensure that all agreements, payments, and deliverables are documented clearly. This will be vital in any legal discussions that may arise in the future.
- Seek Legal Advice: It's prudent to have legal counsel review any contracts to protect your interests.
- Consider Full Project Corporation: Evaluate other projects completed by the builder to gauge success rates and customer satisfaction.
General Tips for Selecting Any Builder:
- Check Licensing and Regulation Compliance: Ensure that the builder follows local laws and is appropriately licensed.
- Assess Financing Options and Their Transparency: Understand the payment structures and ensure they are clear and justifiable.
- Explore Reviews and Testimonials: Look into past client reviews and testimonies to understand the builder’s reputation and buyer satisfaction.
In conclusion, while A.R. Infrastructure Biology operates in Madhya Pradesh, potential buyers should remain vigilant. By applying the outlined tips, buyers can better navigate the complexities of their purchasing decisions and help safeguard their investments.
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.R. Infrastructure Biology, where the builder lost, revealed several key themes across the disputes. The cases primarily revolved around delayed possession claims, incomplete development work, and project lapse disputes.
Many of the claims made by the applicants centered around the builder's failure to provide possession of properties despite full payment being made. For instance, in one significant case, the applicant highlighted that although he had paid the complete amount for a plot, possession had not been granted, and the requisite development work remained unfinished. The builder, in defense, acknowledged the project's lapse and the incomplete development work, which further illustrates the prevalent issues in fulfilling contractual obligations.
A common reason for litigation in these cases was the builder’s inability to meet deadlines and complete projects on schedule. Applicants often found themselves in disputes over the delayed possession of their properties and the lack of progress on essential development work. The builder's recurrent lapses in project completion led to a series of legal challenges, all of which culminated in court rulings against them.
The underlying factor contributing to the builder's losses in these cases was their consistent non-compliance with commitments. The rulings typically mandated the builder to fulfill their obligations within a stipulated timeframe, as seen in the aforementioned case where the builder was directed to provide possession within three months. The builder's losses stem from a combination of insufficient evidence to support their claims of project completion and a clear failure to adhere to regulatory requirements governing real estate transactions.
Overall, the analysis indicates a significant trust violation on the part of A.R. Infrastructure Biology with its clients, leading to legal consequences. It highlights the importance for potential buyers to exercise diligence when engaging with builders, ensuring they do not have a history of such legal disputes before making any commitments.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50-23-0090 | Madhya Pradesh | The applicant filed a complaint against the non-a… | ["Non-delivery of p… | {"appellant_claim": "The applicant claimed that h… | Sanjay Jaiswal | A.R. Infrastructure… | https://www.rera.mp.gov.in/upload/complaint_files/b34f1511161318166896b405.pdf |