| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Introduction
When considering a new home, the choice of builder is crucial for a smooth purchasing experience. In this post, we will delve into the background of Om Infrastructure, examining their record of legal disputes and outcomes in the state of Gujarat. With five complaints lodged against them and a 100% loss rate in court cases, potential buyers should observe caution.
Overview of Om Infrastructure
Builder Name: Om Infrastructure
Number of Complaints: 5
Cases Won: 0
Cases Lost: 5
States with Projects: Gujarat
Legal Case Details
Summary of Complaints
- Common Allegations: A recurring theme across the complaints filed against Om Infrastructure relates to the construction quality. Homebuyers reported defects such as swollen doors, malfunctioning windows, and inadequate plumbing. Additionally, several complaints mentioned unauthorized allotment of parking spaces that should have been reserved for residents.
- Builder's Defense: In the builder's responses, they consistently denied the allegations and asserted that all construction was performed in accordance with approved plans and necessary permissions.
- Verdicts: The Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) ruled in favor of complainants by ordering Om Infrastructure to rectify some defects and adhere to approved plans. Notably, the builder consistently lost cases, with no wins recorded.
Specifics of Lost Cases
- Construction Defects: Multiple homeowners highlighted significant construction defects, which were partially corroborated by the authority's verdicts requiring corrective actions.
- Failure to Provide Documentation/Ownership: In one case, a complainant expressed frustration at having paid for a flat without receiving the necessary ownership documents or possession. This indicates a potential oversight in customer service and project management.
- Regulatory Violations: Om Infrastructure was penalized for failing to follow RERA regulations, including not submitting completion reports and neglecting instructions related to project completions.
Key Observations
- Patterns in Lost Cases: The majority of cases lost by Om Infrastructure related to construction quality and regulatory non-compliance. Complaints regarding defects are highly prevalent, suggesting a systemic issue with building standards or oversight.
- Winning Cases: Interestingly, there are no records of Om Infrastructure winning any cases. This has significant implications for potential buyers, given that no successful disputes signify a lack of favorable outcomes for the builder in legal confrontations.
Conclusion
The record of Om Infrastructure raises red flags for potential buyers. The cumulative evidence of complaints, coupled with a complete lack of victories in legal disputes, indicates a concerning pattern that buyers should be aware of.
Tips for Potential Buyers
- Research Thoroughly: Investigate builder reputations and reviews before making a decision. Look into any legal disputes they may have faced.
- Demand Transparency: Ensure that the builder provides clear documentation regarding project completion, ownership, and compliance with regulatory standards.
- Seek Legal Advice: Consider consulting a real estate lawyer when navigating contracts and agreements to avoid potential pitfalls.
General Tips When Selecting a Builder
- Review Their Portfolio: Investigate past projects to assess quality and adhere to safety standards.
- Check Regulatory Compliance: Ensure the builder is compliant with local real estate regulations, especially those established by RERA.
- Approach with Caution: If there are multiple complaints or a history of legal issues, it may be prudent to consider alternative builders.
In conclusion, a careful assessment of Om Infrastructure's legal history suggests it may be wise for potential homebuyers to tread carefully when pursuing any projects from 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 Om Infrastructure, where the builder lost, reveals significant insights into the common themes and disputes associated with their projects.
The cases can be broadly categorized into three themes: defects in construction and unauthorized allotments, penalties for non-compliance and delayed reporting, and disputes over property documents and possession.
The majority of the cases revolve around the first theme, where the complainants alleged that the builder had constructed their apartment buildings with numerous defects where the builder failed to provide promised amenities and quality construction. They highlighted issues such as swollen doors, malfunctioning windows, and inadequate plumbing, alongside claims of unauthorized parking space allocations to commercial units.
The second theme involves penalties imposed on the builder for violating the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. In one case, the builder failed to furnish mandatory project completion reports, which led to a direct financial penalty, indicating a systemic issue with compliance and reporting within the company.
The last theme encompasses disputes related to property documentation and possession. In one notable case, a complainant asserted that despite having paid the full price for a flat, they had not received any documents or possession of the property. However, this case was dismissed due to the complainant's failure to provide adequate evidence, highlighting the importance of proper documentation in real estate transactions.
Common triggers for litigation in these cases include the builder’s non-compliance with the approved construction plans, failure to deliver promised amenities, and insufficient transparency in dealings with homeowners. The builder's repeated denials of allegations and their claims of adherence to plans and regulations suggest a fundamental misunderstanding of their obligations or an attempt to obscure the truth.
The reasons for Om Infrastructure's losses in these cases are multifaceted. In cases involving construction defects, the evidence provided by complainants was sufficient to convince the authority that the builder had indeed failed to meet required standards. The builder's non-compliance with regulatory requirements, such as failing to submit project reports, directly resulted in penalties. In the case of disputes over documents and possession, the builder's claims of proper dealings were undermined by the complainant's circumstances, although the burden of proof was not met in that instance.
Overall, these cases paint a picture of a builder that has faced challenges in delivering quality construction, complying with regulations, and fulfilling their commitments to homeowners. Buyers considering projects from Om Infrastructure should take these patterns into account and exercise diligence in their purchasing decisions.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMP/A/Offline/Ahmed… | Gujarat | The complainant's complaint was dismissed as they… | ["Failure to provid… | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that… | Sweety R. Retia | Om Infrastructure | https://drive.google.com/uc?id=19-JXP_k9553L3GY5Ui4pneKPQBEtWr6s |