BORIVALI SAI SUMAN CHS LIMITED

Introduction

When selecting a builder for your new home, understanding their legal standing can play a crucial role in your decision-making process. Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited, based in Maharashtra, has come under scrutiny due to its track record in legal cases. This overview delves into the details surrounding the builder, their legal challenges, and what potential buyers should consider.

Overview of Legal Issues Faced by Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited

Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited has faced a total of 4 legal complaints. Alarmingly, the builder has not won any of the cases against them, indicating a concerning trend. In fact, all 4 cases have been lost, raising questions about the reliability and accountability of the builder.

Case Summary

1. Cases Lost：
   • All complaints resulted in unfavorable outcomes for the builder. There were no specifics provided on these cases, but the common factor is persistent legal failures.
2. Cases Filed Where the Builder ‘Won’：
   • Surprisingly, there is an interpretation of 'winning' with regards to cases, as the appellants chose to withdraw their appeals in these instances. In two cases, the appellants withdrew their appeals, while in the other two, the appellants sought to withdraw a Misc. Application with permission to file fresh applications. These circumstances suggest a willingness from the appellants to explore other avenues rather than achieving a favorable ruling against the builder.

Analysis of Legal Patterns

Cases Lost:

• The cases lost by Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited do not provide specific details. However, the outcome signals potential issues with the quality of construction, adherence to regulations, or customer satisfaction—common factors that typically lead to legal disputes in the real estate sector. Without specific allegations, it remains unclear whether these are procedural issues or rooted in the builder's practices.

Cases 'Won':

• The predictable pattern observed in these cases is the decision of appellants to withdraw their claims. This pattern suggests that the disputes may not have sufficient merit to proceed through the legal system, at least from the appellants’ perspective, or that negotiations behind the scenes could be playing a role in these withdrawals.

Conclusion

The legal standing of Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited raises significant concerns for potential homebuyers. The absence of any victories in legal disputes paints a troubling picture of the builder’s reliability and quality assurance practices.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Conduct Thorough Research: Before making any commitments, ensure to look into the builder's track record in depth, including customer reviews and any legal challenges they may have faced.
2. Seek Expert Advice: Consult legal experts or real estate professionals who can provide insights and guidance on builders with a less favorable record.
3. Consider Project Lifecycle: Understanding how the builder has managed previous projects, especially in terms of quality and timelines, can provide valuable insight into what you can expect.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Check Credentials: Verify the builder's licenses, registrations, and any affiliations with industry bodies.
• Visit Previous Projects: If possible, visit existing projects constructed by the builder to assess quality and customer satisfaction firsthand.
• Review Contracts Thoroughly: Ensure that all conditions, terms of delivery, and warranty information are clearly outlined before signing any agreements.

In summary, while Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited operates in a popular region of Maharashtra, potential buyers should approach their dealings with caution, taking into account the builder's legal history and seeking adequate protections.

Analysis of the cases filed against Borivali Sai Suman CHS Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key points across the spectrum of disputes encountered by the builder. The cases highlight a range of themes, notably the frequent withdrawal of appeals and miscellaneous applications, indicating a pattern where the builder, or the appellants in relation to the builder, chose to retract their legal actions rather than pursue them to a conclusive verdict.

One of the most recurring themes in these cases is the withdrawal of appeals and applications, with multiple instances where the appellants sought to withdraw their appeals and miscellaneous applications to pursue different legal paths. This suggests a strategic decision-making process on the part of the builder or the appellants, possibly indicating a reevaluation of their legal claims or a desire to address their grievances through alternative avenues that might be more expedient or cost-effective.

Additionally, there are notable instances where the builder's opponents did not raise any substantive claims, signaling a lack of counterarguments or grievances presented during the litigation process. This could imply that the builder's actions did not meet the threshold for prompting a meaningful response or that the claims made were not significant enough to warrant a defense.

The common reasons for bringing cases to court in these scenarios revolve around the builder’s decision to withdraw and refile, which could be prompted by several factors, including insufficient evidence to support their claims, a misunderstanding of legal or regulatory requirements, or a tactical choice to avoid an unfavorable ruling. The patterns emerging from these summaries indicate that the builder's litigation often concluded without addressing the underlying issues, resulting in cases that ended with the builder's withdrawal rather than a decisive judgment.

The frequent grant of liberty to file fresh claims suggests that the legal system accommodated the builder's strategic choices, allowing them to keep their legal options open. However, the recurring nature of these withdrawals highlights a potential issue regarding the builder's commitment to resolving disputes through the legal process or their readiness to face the outcomes of their litigation efforts.