LUCINA LAND DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
- No of Complaints: 4
- States (Active in): Maharashtra
| CIN | U70109DL2006PLC151260 |
|---|---|
| Year Established | 25-Jul-06 |
| Address | Office No 202, 2nd Floor, A-18, Rama House, Middle Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Delhi New Delhi DL 110001 IN |
| Company Status | Public |
Introduction
When it comes to property development, choosing the right builder is paramount for ensuring a smooth purchasing experience and a secure investment. In this post, we delve into the case of Lucina Land Development Limited, a builder with a notable legal record that draws attention from potential buyers in Maharashtra.
Overview of Legal Challenges
Lucina Land Development Limited has faced a total of 4 complaints against it, with notable results: 0 cases won and 4 cases lost. This data raises red flags for potential homebuyers, as it highlights the builder's consistent challenges in legal disputes.
Analysis of Lost Cases
While specific details regarding the nature of the complaints are not provided, it is clear that each case resulted in a loss for Lucina Land Development Limited, suggesting possible deficiencies in their contract obligations or project delivery. A common thread in the details points to a potential lack of adherence to legal and procedural nuances, which can undermine a builder's credibility.
Examination of Won Cases
Interestingly, there are specific instances noted where the builder had cases filed against it but was able to win on procedural grounds. For example, in cases where written submissions were directed, the tribunal ruled in favor of the builder due to procedural issues on the part of the respondents. However, it’s crucial to note that none of these outcomes reflect positively on the builder's practices or customer satisfaction—they hinge on legal technicalities rather than successful customer resolutions.
Conclusion: An Assessment of Lucina Land Development Limited
Based on the provided data, Lucina Land Development Limited presents a cautious profile for potential home buyers. With a history of losing every complaint against them, along with underlying themes of legal disputes, prospective buyers should approach this builder with care. It's recommended to conduct thorough due diligence, seek independent reviews, and consider alternative options.
Tips for Potential Buyers
- Research Extensively: Prioritize investigating builders' legal histories and customer reviews. Understand their reputation in the market.
- Consult Experts: Engage with industry professionals or real estate agents who can provide insights into builders’ credibility and project quality.
- Review Contracts Carefully: Pay close attention to contract details before committing to a purchase. Seek legal advice to ensure all obligations are clearly defined.
- Request References: Speak to former clients of the builder to gauge their experiences and satisfaction levels with completed projects.
General Tips for Selecting Any Builder
- Verify Licenses and Certifications: Ensure the builder is licensed and adheres to local regulations.
- Look for Established Track Records: Choose builders with a long-standing reputation and positive feedback.
- Assess Quality of Work: Visit previous projects or developments to evaluate the quality and craftsmanship of their work firsthand.
- Understand the Warranty: Confirm the terms of the warranty or guarantee provided, ensuring it offers adequate protection for your investment.
In summary, while Lucina Land Development Limited has managed to navigate procedural wins in legal disputes, the overall picture is concerning. Homebuyers should remain vigilant and prioritize thorough research and expert advice when considering this builder.
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 Lucina Land Development Limited, where the builder lost, revealed several key themes across the complaints raised by the other parties. The cases can be broadly categorized into three main topics: compliance with document submission, the necessity of written submissions, and the relevance of documents referred to in the complaints.
The first type of cases revolved around the builder's compliance with submitting necessary documents. In these instances, the allottees claimed that the documents were part and parcel of the complaint and had been previously referred to in the impugned order. The builder, on the other hand, contested this by stating that the documents were either not produced during the complaint proceedings or were not relevant to the case at hand. The tribunal consistently dismissed the builder's application, indicating a pattern where the builder likely misjudged the importance and relevance of the submitted documents.
The second theme focused on the requirement for written submissions from both parties involved in the case. Interestingly, there were instances where the builder did not file written submissions, leading to a direct instruction from the tribunal to do so and serve a copy to the other side. This highlights a troubling trend where the builder may not have been taking the necessary steps to actively participate in the legal process, which could have contributed to their losses.
The underlying reasons for these legal disputes seem to stem from a combination of factors. Commonly, the cases were brought to court due to disagreements over project delays, the relevance of submitted documents, and compliance with legal requirements. The builder's frequent loss of cases suggests that they may have consistently underestimated the importance of thorough document submission and adherence to regulatory compliance. The tribunal's decisions imply that the builder failed to meet the required standards, leading to legal consequences.
In conclusion, the primary reasons for Lucina Land Development Limited's losses in these cases appear to be insufficient evidence, non-compliance with legal or regulatory requirements, and a failure to adequately participate in the submission process. These patterns serve as critical insights for potential buyers, who should consider these legal challenges when contemplating a purchase from this builder.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AT006000000010978/19 | Maharashtra | The appellant filed written submissions, but the … | ["Written submissio… | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant filed written … | Navin Kumar | Lucina Land Dev. Li… | https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1GJKN5I4rXdduN-zbzOO9jbPn1SdeiHk4 |