CIN | Not Available |
---|---|
Year Established | Not Available |
Address | Not Available |
Company Status | Not Available |
Overall Case Outcomes
Choosing the right builder is a critical step in the home-buying process. One such builder is S Skewer Developers, a company that has been involved in legal matters under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) in India. In this blog, we will delve into the legal issues faced by S Skewer Developers, focusing on their complaints, case outcomes, and what this means for potential home buyers.
S Skewer Developers has been the subject of one complaint, resulting in one case lost. There were no cases that the builder won, highlighting a concerning trend regarding their legal track record.
The complaint against S Skewer Developers involved a claim by the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority, asserting that the builder had violated Section 13(1) of the RERA Act. The accusation was that S Skewer Developers collected more than 10% of the sale consideration from 22 unit holders without registering the agreement for sale, which is a requirement under the law.
In response, S Skewer Developers argued that the collection of this amount was necessitated by unforeseen circumstances and that the agreements were signed later. However, the authority ruled against them, confirming the violation and imposing a penalty of Rs 60,000 on the builder. This outcome indicates a serious issue, as they lost the case and were penalized for their actions.
In S Skewer Developers' sole legal case, the factors included:
There is no available data regarding cases won by S Skewer Developers, as they have lost the only case reported. This complete absence of victories presents a red flag about the builder's ability to navigate legal challenges effectively.
Based on the provided data, S Skewer Developers has demonstrated a worrying track record with one lost case and no wins. The violation of RERA guidelines and the financial penalty imposed point to significant shortcomings in their operational practices.
In conclusion, while S Skewer Developers operates within Gujarat, potential buyers should approach any engagement with caution due to the legal challenges faced by the company. Being informed is essential in making a smart investment in real estate.
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Analysis of the cases filed against S Skewer Developers, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes across the disputes. The primary areas of contention can be categorized into non-compliance with the RERA Act, defenses based on unforeseen circumstances, and penalties incurred due to the early collection of sale consideration.
The cases often revolved around S Skewer Developers' failure to adhere to the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, particularly concerning the collection of deposits from prospective buyers before formal registration of the sale agreements. In one notable instance, the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority claimed that the builder had violated Section 13(1) of the RERA Act by collecting more than 10% of the sale consideration from 22 unit holders prematurely. The builder's defense—that the collections were due to unforeseen circumstances and that agreements were signed later—did not stand, leading to a penalty of Rs 60,000.
Common reasons for litigation in these cases primarily include regulatory non-compliance, resulting in penalties, and disputes over financial dealings between builders and buyers. The builders often contest these penalties by arguing that their actions were necessitated by unforeseen circumstances. However, the underlying pattern that emerges from these summaries indicates a significant lack of adherence to the RERA Act, which serves to protect the interests of real estate buyers.
The builder's losses in these cases can be attributed to several factors, most notably non-compliance with the RERA Act and insufficient evidence to support their defenses. The repeated failure to follow regulatory guidelines, such as registering agreements for sale before collecting substantial deposits, demonstrates a systemic issue within their operational practices. Furthermore, the builder's reliance on an unforeseen circumstances defense suggests a potential misunderstanding of their obligations under the law, as this defense did not resonate with the authorities in the case highlighted.
No reviews for this builder yet. Be the first one to share your thoughts!