Analysis of the cases filed against GLS Infracon Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and key patterns in the disputes. The cases primarily revolve around possession and payment disputes, cancellation notices, and the imposition of holding charges for outstanding dues.

Many of the complaints came from buyers seeking possession of their flats, refunds for excess payments made, and the cancellation of cancellation notices sent by the builder. The builder, on the other hand, typically defended its actions by claiming that buyers failed to pay their outstanding dues, which led to the cancellation of flats. However, the authority reinstated flats in favor of the complainants, indicating a legal recognition of buyers' rights to possession despite payment disputes.

The reasons people commonly brought cases to court include contesting what they perceived as unfair cancellation of their property, disputing the builder's claims of payment arrears, and seeking refunds for payments made over and above the agreed price. A pattern emerges where buyers often found themselves in litigation due to the builder’s imposition of penalties and charges without adequate justification or clear communication regarding payment expectations.

The builder lost these cases primarily due to a failure to adhere to the agreed payment terms and for imposing holding charges without authority. The rulings highlighted the importance of transparency and proper communication in buyer-builder relationships, indicating that the builder's actions may have stemmed from misunderstandings of payment requirements or an attempt to enforce overly stringent conditions.

Overall, this underscores the need for prospective buyers to exercise caution when engaging with GLS Infracon or similar builders, ensuring they are aware of their rights and the terms of payment before committing to a purchase.

Analysis of the cases filed by GLS INFRACON Private Limited, which it lost, reveals a troubling pattern in the builder's litigation strategies and outcomes.

The cases can be grouped into key themes based on their nature:

1. Delayed Possession Claims: These cases typically arise when buyers experience delays in receiving possession of their purchased properties. Buyers often claim that the builder has not met the agreed deadlines, leading to dissatisfaction and disputes.
2. Penalties for Project Delays: This theme focuses on instances where penalties were imposed on the builder due to their failure to deliver projects on time. The builder may contest these penalties in court, claiming unforeseen circumstances or delays caused by external factors.
3. Regulatory Non-compliance: Cases under this theme involve the builder allegedly failing to comply with various municipal or state regulations. This could include zoning laws or building codes that, if not adhered to, result in legal action.
4. Disputes over Project Execution: This covers general disputes related to the execution of projects, where disagreements on timelines, construction quality, or adherence to original plans can lead to legal confrontations.

A detailed review of these cases indicates that GLS INFRACON often brought cases to court due to the following reasons:

• Contesting penalties imposed by authorities for delays or non-compliance, suggesting a defense that delays were due to legitimate issues beyond their control.
• Disputing project delays attributed to third parties or external factors, positioning themselves as victims of circumstance rather than flawed execution.

Notably, the builder consistently lost these cases for several reasons:

• Insufficient evidence to support claims or defend against penalties, indicating a lack of robust documentation or records of project timelines.
• Non-compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, which might suggest a failure to fully understand or meet statutory obligations, consequently leading to adverse rulings.
• A tendency to disregard interim directions issued by courts or regulatory bodies, resulting in a perception of negligence or lack of seriousness in addressing the issues raised.

Overall, this analysis highlights critical considerations for potential buyers. It underscores the importance of choosing a builder who has a track record of compliance and timely delivery. Buyers should be cautious of builders like GLS INFRACON who have encountered multiple legal challenges and demonstrate a pattern of litigation losses, as this may reflect underlying operational issues.

This dictionary structure provides key themes related to the builder's disputes and offers a detailed and insightful analysis of the cases that the builder lost, in an easy-to-read manner suitable for potential buyers looking for valuable information.