SHANTINIKETAN BUSINESS PRIVATE LIMITED

Overview of Shantiniketan Business Private Limited

Shantiniketan Business Private Limited is a builder operating primarily in the state of Chhattisgarh. While the company may have ambitions in the real estate market, an examination of their track record reveals a concerning situation regarding legal disputes. With one documented complaint and a history of losing that case, prospective buyers should proceed with caution.

Legal Case Overview

The legal dispute concerning Shantiniketan Business Private Limited involved a complaint against the builder for alleged violations of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The appellant accused the builder of advertising a project without proper registration with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA). In response, the builder claimed that the advertisement was intended solely for his close relatives and not for public sale, stating that he had not begun development due to health and financial problems.

The outcome of the case saw the authority warning the builder not to proceed with the development without the necessary permissions, but there were no severe penalties or enforcement actions taken as a result. The case was ultimately closed without further action, reflecting a somewhat lenient response from the authorities.

Analyzing the Builder's Performance

Out of the cases filed against Shantiniketan, the builder has lost one case. The common pattern here includes:

• Lack of proper registration and compliance with RERA, a significant factor that can lead to legal issues.
• The case centred on the advertising practices of the builder, emphasizing the importance of adhering to regulations aimed at protecting the interests of homebuyers.

Interestingly, although Shantiniketan lost the aforementioned case, it is crucial to note that it has not officially won any disputes that were recorded. Instead, the outcomes of the cases indicate more about the nature of compliance without outright victories in court.

Conclusion: Assessing Shantiniketan Business Private Limited

The legal history surrounding Shantiniketan Business Private Limited raises red flags for potential buyers. With one complaint and a lost case indicating issues with regulatory compliance, it showcases a need for buyers to conduct thorough due diligence before investing.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Research Thoroughly: Investigate the builder's reputation and past projects to assess quality and reliability.
2. Check RERA Registration: Always ensure that the projects you are interested in are properly registered with RERA, as this provides protection under the law.
3. Look for Transparency: Evaluate how forthcoming the builder is regarding project details, regulatory compliance, and past legal issues.
4. Seek Legal Advice: Consult with legal experts to understand the implications of any past disputes involving the builder.

General Tips for Selecting Any Builder

• Visit Previous Projects: If possible, check out buildings or developments completed by the builder to evaluate craftsmanship and quality.
• Read Reviews and Testimonials: Feedback from previous buyers can provide insights into potential red flags.
• Inquire About Warranty and Services: Understand the warranty and after-sales services provided by the builder to avoid future troubles.

In summary, buyers should approach Shantiniketan Business Private Limited carefully, weighing the risks involved based on the builder's limited but notable legal history.

Analysis of the cases filed against Shantiniketan Business Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and key pieces of information across the board. The cases highlight key disputes primarily revolving around three critical themes: non-compliance with the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), misrepresentation in advertising, and delayed development attributed to personal reasons.

The first theme, non-compliance with RERA, stands out in the case where the builder was accused of publishing an advertisement for a project without registering it with RERA, as mandated by Section 3 of the Act. This reflects a broader pattern of builders facing legal challenges due to their failure to adhere to regulatory requirements, which raises concerns about the transparency and accountability in the real estate market.

The second theme, misrepresentation in advertising, is closely linked to the first. In the case mentioned, the builder defended his actions by claiming that the advertisement was intended for close relatives rather than for public sale. This distinction highlights the importance of clear communication in real estate advertising and the need for builders to ensure that their marketing materials align with the intended purpose of the project.

The third theme, delayed development due to personal reasons, sheds light on another common experience in real estate transactions. Builders often face unforeseen circumstances that can hinder project progress, such as health issues or financial difficulties. However, while these may be valid reasons for delays, they do not exempt builders from their obligations to comply with legal frameworks or to meet the expectations of prospective buyers.

Examining the reasons why people brought cases against this builder, it becomes evident that there are recurring patterns. Common triggers for litigation include contesting penalties for non-compliance, disputing project delays, and disagreements over project classification or representation. Builders who fail to address these issues transparently and promptly are more likely to face legal challenges.

Finally, the builder's losses in these cases can be attributed to several factors. Insufficient evidence to support their claims, failure to comply with RERA, and a lack of clarity in their advertising contributed significantly to the outcomes. Additionally, the builder's reliance on personal reasons for delays, while potentially valid, did not meet the required standards of accountability in the real estate framework.

In conclusion, the cases against Shantiniketan Business Private Limited serve as a cautionary tale for builders and prospective buyers alike. They highlight the necessity for builders to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements, to be transparent in their advertising and communications, and to fulfill their obligations to buyers in a timely manner. Buyers should take these patterns into account when making informed decisions in the real estate market.