| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Overall Case Outcomes
Understanding the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Authority: A Deep Dive into Complaints and Legal Outcomes
The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Authority (RERA) has been a crucial player in the real estate landscape, providing necessary regulations and frameworks to ensure transparency and fairness in property dealings. In this post, we will analyze the complaint cases associated with RERA, particularly focusing on the authority's performance in Karnataka.
Overview of Legal Complaints
According to the data, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Authority has encountered a total of 14 complaints, of which 12 resulted in losses for the builder, while only 2 cases were won. This discrepancy highlights areas of concern regarding compliance and operational effectiveness.
Patterns in Cases Lost
A majority of the complaints where the builder lost were characterized by a common theme: non-compliance with necessary statutory obligations. Specifically, these cases revolved around the requirement for a statutory deposit …
Cases Lost by Builder (When Defending)
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Analysis of the cases filed against the builder which it lost revealed several key points across the spectrum of disputes encountered by the builder. The cases highlight two primary themes: Settlement Disputes and Non-Compliance with Office Objections.
The Settlement Disputes theme encompasses cases where the builder claimed where the appellant claimed that the dispute had been settled out of court, yet the respondents contested this assertion, leading to legal action. In each case, the builder's claim of prior settlement was rejected, indicating a significant communication gap or potential misrepresentation of agreement statuses.
The Non-Compliance with Office Objections theme is a recurring reason for the dismissal of the builder's appeals. This highlights a systematic issue where the builder has failed to comply with regulatory or procedural requirements set forth by the authority overseeing the disputes. Such non-compliance raises concerns about the builder's operational adherence to laws and regulations, potentially indicating …
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, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Authority, which the builder won, revealed the following information. The disputes primarily fall under a few key themes, including non-compliance with legal requirements, requests for extensions, disputes over settlements reached outside of court, and allegations related to statutory penalties.
In several cases, appellants claimed that they needed additional time to address office objections, particularly concerning the statutory deposit related to penalty amounts. Despite their requests, the builder's defense consistently highlighted that sufficient opportunity had been granted to comply with legal provisions, specifically Section 43 (5) of the Act. This recurring issue illustrates a common pattern where buyers or appellants frequently cite delays or the need for more time, often without meeting the legal deadlines or requirements set forth by regulatory frameworks.
Another significant aspect is the disputes about orders issued by adjudicating officers or settlements achieved …
Individual case details available for subscribers.
Builder Reviews
No reviews for this builder yet. Be the first one to share your thoughts!