
CIN | U45203DL2003PTC118590 |
---|---|
Year Established | Not Available |
Address | 52, NORTH AVENUE ROAD, PUNJABI BAGH, NEW DELHI DL 110026 IN |
Company Status | Private |
Overall Case Outcomes
Introduction
When buying a home, especially in a rapidly developing region like Haryana, choosing the right builder is crucial. MAPSKO Builders Private Limited has been a significant player in the real estate market, yet, potential buyers must scrutinize the builder's performance, especially in terms of legal disputes. In this post, we will analyze the legal history of MAPSKO Builders, focusing on their complaints, case outcomes, and patterns in their legal battles.
Builder Overview
MAPSKO Builders Private Limited has faced 73 complaints, winning 40 cases while losing 33. Their projects are primarily located in Haryana, indicating a concentration in this region, which may be beneficial for prospective buyers looking for property in this state.
Legal Case Analysis
Cases Lost by MAPSKO Builders
1. Common Factors in Lost Cases:
- Withdrawal of Appeals: A notable number of cases lost by MAPSKO Builders were dismissed as withdrawn, indicating that some disputes …
Cases Lost by Builder (When Defending)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Individual case details available for subscribers.
Cases Lost by Builder (When Filing)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Analysis of the cases filed by MAPSKO BUILDERS Private Limited that resulted in losses reveals several important insights into the nature of disputes involving this builder.
1. Delayed Possession ClaimsA recurring theme in the cases relates to delayed possession of property units. Several complaints involved respondents claiming interest on the amounts paid due to delays in handing over possession. The authorities often calculated delayed possession interest or holding charges, indicating the builder's failure to meet stipulated timelines.
2. Jurisdictional DisputesAnother significant aspect is the jurisdictional disputes where the builder contested the authority of the forum to entertain complaints. For instance, in one case, the builder argued that the complaint for a refund should not be under the purview of the learned Authority. However, the verdict favored the respondents' claims, signifying that the builder’s defenses based on jurisdictional grounds were largely unsuccessful.
3. Maintenance …Individual case details available for subscribers.
Cases Won by Builder (When Filing)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
An analysis of the cases filed by MAPSKO BUILDERS Private Limited, which it won, revealed the following information. The types of cases brought forth by this builder can be categorized into several recurring themes, showcasing the patterns and reasons behind their legal disputes.
- Delayed Possession Claims: A significant number of cases involved disputes regarding delayed possession of units. Buyers often claimed that they had not received possession on the agreed date, leading them to seek refunds or demand interest for the delay. However, the builder was typically able to counter these claims by demonstrating that possession was duly offered, and that any delays were either caused by the buyers themselves or due to non-compliance on the buyers' part.
- Payment Disputes: Payment-related issues featured prominently in these cases. Complaints were raised regarding the lack of timely payments by buyers, with the builder often bringing cases to …
Individual case details available for subscribers.
Cases Won by Builder (When Defending)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
An analysis of the cases filed against the builder MAPSKO BUILDERS Private Limited, which the builder won, revealed several recurring themes and valuable insights about the real estate market.
1. Delayed Possession Claims:
A number of cases centered on allegations from complainants regarding delays in the possession of flats. Claimants consistently asserted that possession was not delivered within the agreed-upon timeframe. However, the builder successfully demonstrated that possession was, in fact, provided as stipulated, and that the complainants were informed about any necessary adjustments to the timeline.
2. Regulatory Compliance and Violations:
Multiple complaints arose around claims that the builder had violated specific provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. In these instances, MAPSKO BUILDERS defense rested on demonstrating adherence to legal regulations. The builder was able to show that the accusations lacked merit or substantial evidence, resulting in dismissals of these claims …
Individual case details available for subscribers.
Builder Reviews
No reviews for this builder yet. Be the first one to share your thoughts!