PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED

Introduction

In the world of real estate, choosing the right builder is paramount for ensuring timely possession, quality construction, and a satisfactory purchasing experience. In this blog, we will delve into the performance of PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE Private Limited—a builder based in Haryana—with a focus on their legal history, particularly the number of complaints filed against them, the outcomes of those cases, and what potential buyers should know before making a purchase.

Company Overview

• Name: PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE Private Limited
• Number of Complaints: 118
• Cases Won: 12
• Cases Lost: 106
• States with Projects: Haryana

Given the high number of complaints against PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, buyers must proceed with caution.

Legal Case Analysis

Cases Lost by PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE

A significant number of cases – 106 out of 118 complaints – were lost by the builder. Here are some critical observations from these cases:

1. COVID-19 Implications: A recurring theme in many cases is the …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

Analysis of the cases filed against PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE Private Limited, where the builder lost, revealed significant insights into the common themes and disputes associated with their projects. The cases can be broadly categorized into several types, highlighting the challenges faced by the builder and the homeowners alike.

One of the most recurring themes was Delayed Possession Claims. Many homeowners filed cases seeking compensation for the delays in possession of their flats. The builder consistently attributed these delays to Force Majeure Claims, citing the COVID-19 pandemic, labor shortages, and various orders from regulatory authorities as causes beyond their control. However, the authorities did not accept these defenses in many instances, leading to decisions mandating interest payments to the complainants for the delayed possession.

Disputes over Project Completion and Handover also stood out, with homeowners claiming that the builder had failed to complete projects on time or deliver possession as …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

The analysis of the cases filed by the builder PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE Private Limited, which it lost, revealed significant insights about the common disputes and patterns associated with its operations.

The builder's cases can be grouped into several recurring themes:

1. Delayed Possession Claims: A consistent theme across multiple cases is the allegation of delayed possession of flats. The builder often claimed that these delays were due to external factors, particularly the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictions aimed at curbing pollution by the National Green Tribunal (NGT). However, the respondents frequently contested this claim and sought interest compensations for the delay.
2. Impact of COVID-19 on Project Completion: Many of the builder's defenses revolved around asserting that the pandemic was a substantial cause for delays in project completion. While this was a significant contributing factor to many delays, it did not absolve the builder from liability as …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

An analysis of the cases filed by the builder, PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE Private Limited, which it won, revealed the following information.

The cases can be grouped into several common themes. Firstly, there are "Delayed Possession Claims," where the builder consistently faced accusations of failing to hand over possession in a timely manner. The builder sought to contest penalties on these grounds, attributing delays to external factors such as municipal regulatory approvals. Secondly, several disputes revolved around "Disputes Over Execution Orders." These involved contesting the fairness of execution orders or the legitimacy of costs associated with project delays. Lastly, "Regulatory Non-Compliance and Appeal" cases have emerged, showcasing the builder's disagreements with authorities regarding execution directives.

Common reasons for bringing these cases to court include contesting penalties for delays often attributed to external agencies or situations deemed as force majeure. The builder frequently disputes accusations of holding back on possession due to …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, which the builder won, revealed the following information. The cases reflect a range of disputes primarily categorized into four relevant themes: Delayed Possession Claims, Settlement Disputes, Quality of Material Complaints, and Jurisdictional Issues.

1. Delayed Possession Claims: In one notable case, a complainant claimed significant delays in possession along with additional unwarranted charges. However, the builder successfully defended itself by highlighting that all disputes had been settled prior to possession, backed by an affidavit from the complainant confirming the settlement.
2. Settlement Disputes: Several cases were dismissed due to the opposing parties either settling their claims or failing to appear in court. This repetition suggests that buyers may sometimes rush into claims without fully understanding the prior agreements or settlements they have made, leading to unnecessary complaints.
3. Quality of Material Complaints: In a case where the …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis