SAMYAK INFRA

Introduction

In the bustling real estate market, potential buyers often face the challenge of selecting a reliable builder. One such builder is Samyak Infra, which operates primarily in Gujarat. In this blog post, we will explore the legal history of Samyak Infra, examining the complaints filed against them, their legal outcomes, and the implications for prospective buyers.

Overview of Complaints

Samyak Infra has been subject to 2 complaints, both of which resulted in losses for the builder. Notably, there have been no cases won by Samyak Infra in the legal context, underscoring a troubling pattern in their operational practices.

Legal Case Details

Samyak Infra's legal challenges can be summarized as follows:

1. Case Highlight 1: The appellant alleged that Samyak Infra had violated the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. They claimed the builder failed to register their project with RERA and advertised without displaying the necessary registration number. The verdict resulted in a fine of Rs. 1,25,000 against the builder for this violation.
2. Case Highlight 2: The applicant claimed that promised facilities—such as a modular kitchen and proper finishing work—were not provided by Samyak Infra. The builder contended that the applicant failed to make remaining payments and did not cooperate in completing the work. Ultimately, the authority directed both parties to carry out a joint inspection and complete the outstanding work, assuming that payments would follow.

Analysis of Patterns in Cases

Cases Lost

The cases that Samyak Infra has lost reveal a few concerning trends:

• Compliance Issues: The first complaint highlights a significant lack of compliance with required regulatory practices, which raises questions about the builder's commitment to industry standards.
• Customer Satisfaction: The second complaint indicates potential issues with customer satisfaction and fulfillment of contractual obligations, suggesting that Samyak Infra struggles to meet buyers' expectations in delivering promised services and facilities.

Cases Won

Conversely, the outcomes from the cases indicate some mitigating factors for the builder:

• Joint Resolution Approach: In the second case, the authority's direction for a joint inspection suggests a willingness to resolve disputes collaboratively, although this does not exempt the builder from accountability.
• Defensive Claims: In both instances, Samyak Infra claimed that the complaints were unfounded or exaggerated, demonstrating a possibly reactive rather than proactive approach to customer service and quality assurance.

Conclusion

The legal history of Samyak Infra paints a concerning picture for potential buyers. With no cases won and 2 losses, it is evident that the builder has faced significant challenges in adhering to regulatory standards and in fulfilling customer expectations.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Due Diligence: Investigate the builder’s track record thoroughly by looking into any legal cases, complaints, or consumer reviews.
2. Verify RERA Registration: Always ensure that your builder is registered with RERA and is compliant with its provisions to protect your investment.
3. Communication: Maintain clear communications with the builder regarding project timelines and deliverables to minimize misunderstandings.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Research: Look beyond the builder's advertising. Seek out third-party reviews and testimonials.
• Ask for References: Speak to previous customers to gauge their experiences.
• Review Contracts Carefully: Always read through the contract's fine print, focusing on responsibilities for both parties.
• Ensure Transparency: Choose a builder who is transparent about their processes and provides clear timelines and detailed project plans.

In conclusion, while Samyak Infra may have had notable projects in Gujarat, the existing complaints and case outcomes warrant caution from potential buyers. Make informed decisions to protect your investment in the real estate market.

Analysis of the cases filed against Samyak Infra, where the builder lost, reveals significant insights into their legal disputes. The cases can be broadly categorized into two themes: RERA compliance and advertising, and failure to deliver promised facilities.

In the first theme, RERA compliance and advertising, the builder was found to have violated the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Specifically, they advertised their project without registering it with RERA and failed to display their registration number on the advertisements. This non-compliance resulted in a financial penalty of Rs. 1,25,000, indicating a serious breach of regulatory requirements.

The second theme involves disputes over promised facilities that the builder failed to deliver. In one case, the applicant claimed that their flat was not equipped with the assured modular kitchen and proper finishing work. The builder's defense centered around the applicant's alleged failure to make remaining payments and cooperate in completing the work. However, the authority ruled that both parties must conduct a joint inspection and fulfill their commitments—which highlights an issue of communication and trust between buyers and builders, as well as the need for builders to adhere to their promotional promises.

Common reasons for these legal disputes include regulatory non-compliance, which reflects a pattern of neglecting legal obligations related to RERA; and disagreements over project delivery, which often revolve around the quality and completeness of promised amenities. The builder’s losses in these cases were largely due to their inability to meet regulatory standards and fulfill contractual promises, resulting in legal consequences and damage to their reputation.