Analysis of the cases filed against Shiv Sai Developers, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and key patterns in the disputes presented in court.

The cases can be broadly categorized into three main topics: Cross Appeals and Documentation, Payment Disputes with Allottees, and Delay Condonation and Procedural Compliance.

Many of the cases revolve around the issue of cross appeals, where the builder's claims of having filed necessary documentation with the Registry were contested by the appellants. This highlights a significant area of concern regarding the builder’s adherence to legal processes and documentation practices, as repeatedly the builder was asked to furnish details of their appeals, indicating a lack of clarity or transparency in their initial filings.

Payment disputes with allottees constitute another major theme, with multiple cases centered on the claimed payment of Rs. 7,000/- to the allottees, which the respondent contested. This indicates a troubling trend where financial dealings between the builder and the homebuyers may not be adequately documented or verified, leading to frequent disputes.

The need for delay condonation and compliance with procedural timelines is a recurring issue in the cases examined. There were several instances where the builder sought condonation for delays, attributing them to unforeseen circumstances such as floods. While some leeway was given in these instances, the consistent pattern of delays raises concerns about the builder's reliability in meeting project timelines and adherence to schedules, which is a critical factor for homebuyers.

Common triggers for litigation include contesting penalties for delays, disputing project delays attributed to other parties, and disagreements over financial transactions. The builder’s losses in these cases often stem from insufficient evidence to support their claims, failure to comply with legal or regulatory requirements, or misunderstandings of procedural rules.

In conclusion, the analysis shows that while Shiv Sai Developers has faced challenges that may be outside their direct control, systematic issues regarding documentation, financial transparency, and adherence to timelines are prevalent and concerning. Homebuyers should take these patterns into account when making informed decisions about their investments.

Analysis of the cases filed by the builder SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS that resulted in losses revealed several key insights into the nature and common themes of disputes faced by this builder. The cases prominently feature elements related to 'Delayed Possession Claims' and 'Disputes over Financial Penalties', often resulting in the builder being required to deposit significant sums as directed by the court. Additionally, issues surrounding 'Non-compliance with Municipal Orders' and 'Regulatory Compliance Issues' have surfaced, highlighting the builder's challenges in adhering to established guidelines.

The recurring theme among the disputes relates to the builder contesting financial penalties likely stemming from delayed project completions. This indicates a pattern where the builder may have faced challenges not merely related to construction timelines but possibly also linked to coordination with regulatory authorities, leading to disputes over anticipated possession dates and financial obligations. Furthermore, there seems to be a tendency for the builder to dispute penalties imposed by regulatory bodies, suggesting a broader challenge in aligning its operations with legal norms.

The common reasons for the builder's losses in these cases could be attributed to a lack of sufficient evidence to back their claims, often leading to unfavorable court directions. The builder may also have struggled to comply with interim directions issued by the courts, resulting in additional penalties or mandates to deposit fines, as reflected in the judgments. Moreover, misunderstandings surrounding land or project classification appear prevalent, which could have negatively impacted the builder's legal standing. Overall, the builder's challenges point to a need for enhanced compliance practices and better collaboration with regulatory frameworks, as failure in these areas seems to significantly contribute to its legal setbacks.

An analysis of the cases filed by the builder, which it won, revealed the following information.

The builder, SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS, has predominantly been involved in disputes centered around delays, specifically focusing on the delay in condoning applications and filing appeals. The cases consistently indicate that the builder contested these delays, attributing them to unforeseen circumstances while opposing parties claimed the delays were unjustified.

In examining the common themes, it appears that these disputes often arise when the builder seeks to condone delays that have occurred during the legal process. The ability of the builder to bring these cases to court suggests a proactive approach in defending their interests, particularly regarding project timelines and compliance with procedural protocols.

One noteworthy pattern extends to the reasons the builder won these cases. In almost all instances, the tribunal granted delay condonation favoring SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS, reflecting a successful defense against claims made by respondents. The tribunal's decisions indicate that the opposing parties frequently fell short in providing sufficient evidence to justify their claims or, conversely, that the unforeseen circumstances cited by the builder played a legitimate role in the delays.

These outcomes contribute positively to SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS’ reputation, positioning them as a builder capable of defending against exaggerated or unfounded claims. The narrative suggests a broader trend within the real estate sector where builders may face groundless allegations from buyers, underscoring the need for diligent evidence and precise legal arguments in litigation.

For potential buyers, this analysis serves as an essential reminder of the complexity of the real estate market dynamics. Claims against builders should be approached with caution, as sensational accusations can lead to unwarranted legal disputes. Buyers are advised to seek factual information and maintain a balanced view before forming opinions about a builder's credibility. In light of the successful defenses put forth by SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS, it is evident that while disputes can arise, strong builders can and do protect their interests against incorrect assertions.

An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS, which the builder won, revealed the following information.

The disputes can be grouped into several common themes that highlight the nature of the allegations and the defenses raised by the builder.

1. Affidavit Disputes: A recurring issue in several cases was the claim that additional affidavits filed by the builder were not considered by the tribunal.
2. The builder consistently defended these claims by asserting that the affidavits were filed without proper leave, resulting in the tribunal dismissing the appeals and ordering costs to be deposited.

1. Delayed Proceedings: Multiple cases involved allegations of delays in proceedings, where the appellants sought condonation for the delays attributed to the builder.
2. The builder countered that the appellants themselves had caused delays, leading to adjournments and giving the respondent one final chance to settle costs.

1. Claims of Delays by Respondents: Interestingly, some claims involved mutual accusations of delay, where respondents sought additional time based on purported delays from the appellants.
2. The cases highlighted a cycle of finger-pointing regarding who was responsible for the delays in proceedings and how the tribunal handled these claims.

1. Costs and Penalties: A common thread across many cases involved the imposition of costs on the respondent for not adhering to procedural requirements or for unnecessary delays, which reinforces the tribunal's directive towards efficient litigation practices.

The reasons for these cases being brought to court largely revolved around contesting penalties for alleged delays, claims concerning the non-consideration of key documentation, and disagreements over procedural conduct in the hearings.

Many cases exhibited patterns indicating that buyers or complainants felt aggrieved by what they perceived as unaddressed grievances, often accompanied by a request to expedite proceedings or address alleged oversights.

The builder won these cases primarily due to the failure of the opposing parties to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims, as well as instances where the respondents did not comply with legal protocols or directives issued during hearings.

Moreover, the tribunal's consistent stance regarding the validity of the builder’s defenses—asserting that additional affidavits without leave should not be considered—demonstrated a robust legal strategy employed by SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS.

This analysis indicates that SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS has established a strong reputation for effectively defending itself against potentially unfounded claims.

It highlights a broader tendency in the real estate market where buyers can sometimes make exaggerated or unfounded accusations, which could escalate into legal disputes.

To summarize, potential buyers are urged to conduct thorough research and make informed decisions before forming opinions about a builder's reputation.

While disputes are a part of the real estate landscape, this analysis shows that builders like SHIV SAI DEVELOPERS can often successfully counter unjust claims, thus reinforcing their standing in the market.