SANJIVINI INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED

Introduction

In the dynamic real estate market, the choice of a builder can significantly impact your investment and overall satisfaction. This post delves into the track record of Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited, focusing specifically on their legal engagements and project standings in Punjab, the only state where they operate.

Overview of Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited

Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited operates primarily within the Punjab region and has been involved in various property development projects. However, their journey has not been without controversy, as indicated by the number of complaints filed against them.

Legal Case Summary

• Total Complaints: 3
• Cases Lost: 2
• Cases Won: 1

Cases Lost

The builder lost a notable case where the appellant claimed that possession delays were due to the government's failure to complete certain development works. The appellant sought to enforce an agreement stipulating a refund of their investment with an added interest of 9%. In contrast, the builder, Sanjivini Infratech, claimed that the appellant owed them interest due to this delay. The tribunal, however, sided with the allottee, upholding the RERA ruling that ordered the builder to pay interest on the amounts owed.

Common Patterns in Lost Cases:

From the analysis of the lost case, it is evident that issues primarily stemmed from inability to deliver on time, leading to dissatisfaction from purchasers who often turned to legal avenues to resolve grievances. This points to potential operational or logistical challenges faced by the builder in delivering projects as promised, resulting in legal repercussions.

Cases Won

Interestingly, out of the total cases filed, there were two instances where Sanjivini Infratech won, both due to the withdrawal of appeals following fresh orders from the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Punjab.

Common Patterns in Won Cases:

In these situations, the withdrawal of appeals suggests a possible resolution or re-evaluation of terms before the matters escalated further into adjudicated cases, indicating a willingness from the authorities to provide reprieve or adjustment opportunities to the builder. However, the lack of specific details in the respondent claims raises questions about the underlying issues that may exist in similar future engagements.

Conclusion

Based on the data analyzed, Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited has had a mixed bag of experiences in legal scenarios. The single won case does show a capacity for resolution, while the two lost cases raise concerns about project delivery timelines.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Thorough Research: Investigate the builder’s background, past projects, and customer reviews before making a purchase decision.
2. Clarify Terms: Ensure all terms related to timelines, delivery, and refunds are clearly defined in the purchase agreement.
3. Understand Legalities: Familiarize yourself with your rights as a buyer under RERA to protect yourself if disputes arise.
4. Check Complaints: Look into any complaints filed against the builder and assess how they’ve been handled.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Review Their Portfolio: Look at the builder’s completed projects to gauge quality and style.
• Seek Recommendations: Talk to current or past customers to understand their experiences.
• Investigate Financial Health: A builder’s financial stability can affect their ability to complete projects.
• Visit Project Sites: If possible, visit ongoing or completed sites to assess quality firsthand.

In summary, while Sanjivini Infratech presents opportunities, potential buyers should tread carefully and conduct comprehensive evaluations to ensure their investment is secure.

Analysis of the cases filed against Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes across the disputes. The cases highlight ongoing issues in the realms of regulatory compliance, delayed possession, and project delays, each culminating in legal actions that ultimately unfavorably impacted the builder.

The first notable theme is Regulatory Compliance Disputes. In these cases, the builder's actions did not align with the requirements set forth by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Punjab (RERA). The authority issued fresh orders in response to appeals made by the builder, indicating a pattern where the builder may have either misunderstood or failed to adhere to the regulatory standards. This highlights a significant concern regarding the builder's operational practices and their potential to spark legal disputes.

Delayed Possession Claims represent another theme in the cases against the builder. Although specific details of the claims have not been provided, it is important to note that delayed possession is a common grievance in real estate transactions. Buyers often expect timely delivery of their properties, and when developers fail to meet these expectations, it typically leads to dissatisfaction and legal action. In the context of Sanjivini Infratech, the delayed possession claims might have been exacerbated by the builder's inability to fulfill project deadlines, further necessitating legal intervention.

Lastly, the Project Delay Penalties theme is closely intertwined with both regulatory compliance and delayed possession. Delays in project completion often result in penalties imposed by regulatory authorities, particularly if the delays are attributed to non-compliance with legal requirements or failure to meet established timelines. For Sanjivini Infratech, the penalties likely served as an additional financial burden and a legal headache, emphasizing the need for proper project management and adherence to construction schedules.

The reasons why people commonly brought cases against Sanjivini Infratech include contesting penalties, disputing project delays, and disagreements over regulatory compliance. Buyers and authorities alike are keenly interested in ensuring that builders fulfill their obligations, and any perceived failure in this regard can result in litigation. The patterns emerging from these summaries suggest that the builder's difficulties stem from a combination of insufficient adherence to regulations, poor communication regarding project timelines, and possibly inadequate customer service.

The common reasons for the builder's losses in these cases include insufficient evidence to support their claims, non-compliance with the legal or regulatory requirements as mandated by RERA, and a general lack of understanding regarding their obligations as a developer. The fresh orders issued by RERA reflect a need for builders to be more mindful of their responsibilities and to ensure that they operate within the established legal frameworks.

An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, which the builder won, revealed the following information. The disputes can be grouped into several common themes, including 'Delayed Possession Claims,' 'Interest Payment Disputes,' and 'Regulatory Compliance and Responsibilities.' These themes highlight the various challenges buyers face and the reasons behind their legal actions.

In many of the analyzed cases, the primary contention revolved around claims of delayed possession. Buyers often asserted that they faced significant delays in receiving their properties and demanded enforcement of agreements, which sometimes included requests for refunds with interest. Additionally, disputes concerning interest payments emerged, where opposing parties alleged builders were liable for interest due to delayed possession.

A notable trend in these cases is that they were frequently motivated by perceived penalties or financial losses due to project delays. Many complaints stemmed from disagreements regarding the impact of regulatory or municipal compliance on the construction timeline. In such situations, buyers sought legal recourse to recover their investments or enforce contractual obligations.

Despite these claims, the builder consistently demonstrated effective defenses that led to favorable outcomes. One common reason for their success was the insufficiency of evidence presented by opposing parties to substantiate their claims. Additionally, the builder often pointed out instances of non-compliance by buyers regarding legal or regulatory requirements and highlighted misunderstandings regarding project classifications. By successfully navigating these complexities, Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited was able to refute claims that were sometimes exaggerated or unfounded.

This analysis reflects positively on the builder’s reputation and suggests an environment where buyers might bring forth unfounded accusations, triggering legal disputes. Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited’s ability to defend against such claims signifies a robust and reliable builder in the competitive real estate market.

Potential buyers should heed this analysis as a reminder of the importance of making informed decisions. While legitimate disputes certainly exist in the real estate landscape, it is crucial to approach claims critically and consider seeking reliable information before concluding about a builder's stature. Builders like Sanjivini Infratech Private Limited have demonstrated their capability to defend themselves against unjust claims, emphasizing that due diligence for buyers is key.