FALCON REALITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED

Introduction

Falcon Reality Services Private Limited, operating in Rajasthan, has recently drawn attention due to its track record involving customer complaints and legal disputes. In this blog, we will analyze the number of complaints lodged against the builder, the outcomes of these cases, and provide insights for potential buyers considering investment in properties offered by this developer.

Overview of Legal Cases

Falcon Reality Services has been involved in two complaints that have concluded unfavorably for the builder. Notably, in both instances, the complainants were unable to secure possession of flats they had paid for within the Gulmohar Woods project. The issues reported by the complainants were significant, highlighting a pattern of incomplete projects and unmet promises.

1. Case Summary
   • Complainant's Claim: Each complainant claimed to have paid Rs. 17.26 lakh for flats in the Gulmohar Woods project with the expectation of timely possession.
   • Builder's Response: Falcon Reality Services did not file any claims or defenses in either case.
   • Final Verdict: The authority directed the builder to refund the full amount paid by complainants, along with accrued interest.

Patterns and Common Factors in Cases Lost

Analyzing the cases where Falcon Reality Services lost, a few specific patterns emerge:

• Lack of Defense: The builder did not respond to the complaints, leading to a lack of counterarguments or explanations that could contextualize the delays or issues in project completion.
• Repetitive Complaint Nature: Both cases were identical in terms of the claim amount and project specifics, indicating a systemic issue with the builder's handling of the Gulmohar Woods project.

These elements suggest that the builder may not have put sufficient mechanisms in place to manage client expectations or project fulfillment.

Patterns in Cases Won

Interestingly, while the builder has lost cases, there are no indications of cases won. The data presented reflects a 100% loss rate, which raises questions about the builder's operational viability and commitment to fulfilling contracts. As such, potential buyers should note the absence of successful legal defenses.

Conclusion

Based on the available data, Falcon Reality Services Private Limited shows a concerning pattern regarding customer satisfaction, particularly evident through the legal disputes processed against them. The lack of any successful outcomes for the builder in legal cases points to significant operational issues and unmet obligations. These facts should be carefully considered by any prospective buyers.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Thorough Research: Prospective buyers should conduct extensive research into a builder’s history, focusing on completed projects, customer reviews, and any legal complaints.
2. Demand Transparency: Always seek clarity regarding project timelines and possession dates before making an investment.
3. Legal Precedents: Investigate previous legal cases involving the builder to gauge their reputation and reliability.

General Tips for Buyers When Selecting Any Builder

• Check Credentials: Verify the builder's credentials, licenses, and registration with local real estate authorities.
• Visit Completed Projects: If possible, visit completed projects to see quality and talk to current residents about their experiences.
• Advice from Experts: Consult with real estate agents or legal advisors for a comprehensive understanding of contracts and possible risks.

In conclusion, potential buyers must be prudent and informed when considering investments with Falcon Reality Services, paying close attention to the outcomes of previous complaints to avoid falling into similar situations.

Analysis of the cases filed against Falcon Reality Services Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and patterns across the disputes. The cases primarily revolve around claims made by buyers regarding delayed possession and uncompleted projects, particularly concerning the 'Gulmohar Woods' project.

The most common theme in these cases is the Delayed Possession Claim. Buyers claimed to have made substantial payments of Rs. 17.26 lakh for flats in the project, yet the builder failed to complete it and provide possession, leading to legitimate claims for refunds. This theme highlights an overarching issue with the builder's ability to adhere to timelines and fulfill contractual obligations, which is a major concern for potential buyers.

Another theme that emerges from these cases is Project Completion Disputes. While the primary focus was on the delayed possession, the underlying issue was the incomplete project itself. Buyers’ payments were not only for immediate possession but also for a guaranteed completed product, which was not delivered. This raises questions about the builder's project management capabilities and the reliability of their completion schedules.

Refund Claims due to Non-Delivery directly relate to the first two themes. Buyers, after facing delays and unfulfilled promises of possession, resorted to claiming refunds based on the builder’s failure to deliver what was promised. The authority's decision to direct the builder to refund the amounts paid, along with interest, indicates a legal acknowledgment of the buyers' rights and the builder's obligations, which were not met.

A pattern that is strikingly clear from the summaries is that buyers commonly brought cases to court due to the builder’s inability to complete projects on time and deliver promised units. There was also a notable absence of defense or claims presented by the builder, which could indicate a lack of substantial counterarguments or evidence of compliance with contractual obligations.

The builder lost these cases primarily due to their failure to provide timely possession and complete projects as promised. The insufficient defense or lack of a valid response to the claims likely points to an acknowledgment of shortfalls or an inability to meet regulatory and contractual requirements. Overall, these cases serve as a cautionary tale for potential buyers, emphasizing the importance of scrutinizing a builder's past projects, reviews, and litigation history before making significant financial commitments.