PRATHIKSHA PROPERTIES

Introduction

In the bustling real estate market of Tamil Nadu, Prathiksha Properties stands out as a builder with a noteworthy portfolio. However, potential buyers should tread carefully, as the builder's encounter with legal challenges raises questions regarding its reliability and service. This blog post aims to provide an in-depth analysis of Prathiksha Properties, focusing on their legal history, case outcomes, and valuable insights for prospective buyers.

Legal Case Overview

Prathiksha Properties has faced a total of five complaints, resulting in one win and four losses in various legal disputes. These outcomes offer a glimpse into the builder's operational practices and customer satisfaction levels.

Cases Lost

One significant aspect of Prathiksha Properties' legal landscape is the case the builder filed and lost. In this instance, the appellant (the buyer) claimed that the builder owed a balance of Rs. 17,07,899/- for two apartments. The builder's defense hinged on the assertion that they …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

Analysis of the cases filed against Prathiksha Properties, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and patterns. The disputes primarily center around two topics: delayed possession claims and disputes over construction costs and payments.

The delayed possession claims highlight the frustration from buyers when flats are not handed over on time. In multiple instances, buyers claimed that they had paid for their flats yet possession was not granted by the builder. The builder, on the other hand, often countered with claims of unpaid balance construction costs or asserted that additional amounts were owed for various services. This indicates a significant communication gap between the builder and the buyers regarding payment expectations and timelines for delivery.

The disputes over construction costs and payments demonstrate a lack of transparency about what buyers are obligated to pay. Buyers often found themselves facing demands for additional funds after they believed their payments were …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

The analysis of the cases filed by the builder Prathiksha Properties that it lost reveals several insights into the primary themes of litigation in the real estate sector. Notably, the disputes are centered on two key issues: payment balance disputes and possession claims.

1. Disputes over Payment Balance: In the case summaries, a recurring theme is the builder's claim of outstanding payments that the respondents had allegedly not settled. For example, Prathiksha Properties sought to claim a balance amount for apartments even after the respondents claimed all required payments were completed. Such disputes typically emerge when there is a lack of clear documentation or disagreement over payment terms and amounts.
2. Possession Claims: Another notable trend is the possession claims whereby the builder asserts that the respondents should not receive possession of their properties due to outstanding payments. Yet, the courts have favored the respondents, ordering the …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis

An analysis of the cases filed by the builder, which it won, revealed the following information. The disputes primarily involved regulatory jurisdiction and project registration exemptions.

One significant theme was that of 'Regulatory Jurisdiction Disputes.' In these instances, the builder, Prathiksha Properties, challenged complaints brought against it before TNRERA, asserting that the authority did not have jurisdiction over their project, a claim that the courts upheld by setting aside the orders passed by TNRERA. Additionally, the cases also touched upon exemptions under Section 3(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, where the builder claimed entitlement to operate without registration under certain conditions. This showcases a distinct boundary between legitimate regulatory oversight and the builder's rights to manage its projects without undue interference based on regulatory misinterpretations.

The primary reason the builder brought these cases to court was to contest perceived unfair penalties and disputes regarding the application …

Unlock Full Report & Analysis