SAMPRATI PROCON PARTNERSHIP FIRM

Introduction

When it comes to selecting a builder for your next property investment, understanding their track record can play a crucial role in your decision-making process. In this post, we take a close look at Samprati Procon Partnership Firm, a builder operating in Gujarat, and analyze their performance based on the legal challenges they've faced.

Overview of Samprati Procon Partnership Firm

Samprati Procon Partnership Firm, though actively engaged in real estate development, has a notable record of legal complaints. With only one complaint filed against them, the builder lost the case, which depicts some of the challenges they may have faced in their operations.

Legal Case Insights

• Case Details: In the case involving the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority, it was determined that Samprati Procon Partnership Firm accepted more than 10% as an advance payment without a written sale agreement, which constitutes a violation of Section 13(1) of the RERA Act.
• Outcome: The authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 on the firm and mandated compliance by registering the agreement for sale in a timely manner.

Analysis of Legal Performance

Cases Lost

• Common Factors: The firm has lost the case based on regulatory breaches regarding advance payments without proper agreements. This indicates a lack of due diligence in adhering to legal constraints, which could reflect on their overall business practices. The absence of successful resolutions in their legal battles raises concerns about their compliance and operational transparency.

Cases Won

• Case Information: Interestingly, although the builder has won one case, it still resulted in a penalty and acknowledgment of a regulatory violation. This highlights a potential pattern of non-compliance that may undermine their reputation despite a legal victory.

Conclusion

Overall, potential buyers must exercise caution when considering purchasing from Samprati Procon Partnership Firm. The record of a lost case and the imposed penalties suggest a need for greater diligence in their business operations.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Conduct Thorough Research: Investigate any builder’s legal history, including any complaints, penalties, or cases won or lost, to gauge their reliability.
2. Request Documentation: Always ask for documentation regarding agreements and contracts before making any advance payments.
3. Consult with Experts: Engage legal professionals who specialize in real estate to review the agreements and terms proposed by the builder.
4. Stay Informed about RERA: Familiarize yourself with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) regulations, especially regarding advance payments and contracts.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Check for Reviews: Look for reviews and testimonials from other buyers to assess the builder's reputation.
• Inspect Completed Projects: If possible, visit completed projects to evaluate the quality of the construction and overall satisfaction of the residents.
• Evaluate Financial Stability: A financially stable builder is more likely to deliver projects on time without compromising quality.

In summary, while Samprati Procon Partnership Firm operates within Gujarat's real estate market, their legal history and the implications of their past challenges warrant close scrutiny from prospective buyers.

Analysis of the cases filed against Samprati Procon Partnership Firm, where the builder lost, revealed several key themes across the disputes. The cases primarily revolved around the builder's non-compliance with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) Act, particularly concerning advance payments and the requirement for written agreements for sale.

The most notable case involved the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority claiming that the builder had accepted more than 10% of the amount as an advance payment without formalizing a written agreement for sale, which is a clear violation of Section 13(1) of the RERA Act. The builder's defense centered around unforeseen circumstances and a promise to rectify the situation within two months, yet this did not mitigate the penalty imposed by the Authority.

Common reasons for the disputes in these cases include regulatory violations, specifically regarding payment acceptance and documentation requirements. People brought cases to court primarily to contest the builder’s actions, which were deemed to be in breach of statutory obligations. A pattern emerges where the builder faced litigation due to a lack of adherence to the RERA Act, highlighting the importance of compliance in the real estate sector.

The builder lost these cases predominantly due to their failure to comply with the RERA Act. The violations were not only procedural but also highlighted a broader issue of non-conformity with regulatory standards. In each case, the builder’s defense was insufficient to reverse the decision made by the Authority, leading to penalties and mandatory corrective actions.