| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Overall Case Outcomes
Overview of Purva Sunflower Purvankara Limited
Purva Sunflower, a project under Purvankara Limited, has garnered attention in the property market of Bengaluru and Karnataka. However, potential homebuyers and investors should be aware of the builder's track record and handle with due diligence before making a purchasing decision.
Legal Performance Breakdown
Purva Sunflower has faced a total of 24 complaints, with 6 cases won and 18 cases lost. This raises some concerns over its operational practices and customer satisfaction levels.
Cases Lost by the Builder
In the 18 cases lost, several patterns can be identified:
- Non-compliance Issues: A significant number of cases were dismissed due to the builder's failure to comply with statutory requirements, particularly regarding deposits. This indicates a potential issue in sound financial practices and compliance with legal obligations.
- Refund and Financial Dispute: Multiple cases involved disputes regarding the refund of payments, especially related to GST and …
Cases Lost by Builder (When Defending)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Analysis of the cases filed against Purva Sunflower Purvankara Limited, where the builder lost, revealed several key themes and patterns across the disputes. The cases can be broadly categorized into four types: Delayed Possession Claims, Refund and Advance Payment Disputes, Compensation for Delays and Mismatches, and Excess Charges and Preferential Location Fees.
The most prominent theme was Delayed Possession Claims, where multiple complainants sought compensation for the builder's failure to deliver possession of their flats on time. Reasons for the delays were often contested, with the builder attributing them to various factors such as quality assessment and certification, while homeowners claimed that the project was completed later than expected.
Refund and Advance Payment Disputes were another common theme. In these cases, plaintiffs often claimed that they had made advance payments that were not refunded as promised. The builder's defense typically hinged on claims that the …
Individual case details available for subscribers.
Cases Lost by Builder (When Filing)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
The analysis of the cases filed by the builder Purva Sunflower Purvankara Limited, which resulted in losses, reveals significant insights regarding their legal challenges and disputes.
1. Non-compliance with Office Objections:
A recurring theme in the cases is the builder's failure to comply with office objections. Specifically, the builder lost appeals on two occasions for not adhering to statutory deposit requirements. This non-compliance seems to have been a critical legal misstep that the courts highlighted, emphasizing the importance of fulfilling preliminary procedural obligations.
2. Jurisdiction Disputes:
Another notable aspect is the builder's claims regarding the jurisdiction of the RERA Authority. In two cases, the builder contested the authority's right to entertain the complaints lodged against them. In both instances, the courts confirmed the authority's jurisdiction, further emphasizing the builder's responsibility in handling regulatory frameworks specific to real estate.
3. Refund and Compensation Claims:
The …
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 the builder, which it won, revealed the following information. The builder, Purva Sunflower Purvankara Limited, frequently entered into litigation primarily revolving around jurisdictional disputes concerning the powers of Adjudicating Officers and claims for delay compensation. These cases were characterized by the builder contesting orders that they believed were issued without proper jurisdiction and seeking remand to the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) for further scrutiny.
Many of these cases followed a common pattern: the builder claimed that the Adjudicating Officer lacked the jurisdiction necessary to issue the orders in question. In each instance, the builder sought to set aside the orders and remand the matters for fresh consideration by RERA. This suggests that the builder was vigilant about the legal frameworks governing real estate transactions and proactive in challenging decisions that they perceived as unfounded or legally questionable.
The common reasons for the …
Cases Won by Builder (When Defending)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, Purva Sunflower Purvankara Limited, which the builder won, revealed the following information.
The cases can be grouped into two main themes: RERA Compliance Issues and Refund Claims and Settlements.
- RERA Compliance Issues: A consistent point of contention arises from complaints related to registration of projects under the RERA (Real Estate Regulation and Development Act). For instance, one complainant argued that they should be refunded for a project that was not registered with RERA; however, the developer successfully defended that the project was completed before RERA was enacted, thus not requiring registration. This underscores the importance of understanding RERA's timeline and how it applies to specific projects.
- Refund Claims and Settlements: Another common dispute revolves around claims for the refund of booking amounts and compensation for delays. In one of the cases, the builder was able to demonstrate that …
Individual case details available for subscribers.
Builder Reviews
No reviews for this builder yet. Be the first one to share your thoughts!