SHOURYAPURAM-STPL

Introduction

In the complex world of real estate, the reputation of builders is often scrutinized, especially in light of legal disputes. This blog post delves into the builder SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, examining their legal challenges and the implications for potential buyers.

Builder Overview

• Name: SHOURYAPURAM-STPL
• Number of Complaints: 4
• Cases Won: 0
• Cases Lost: 4
• States with Projects: Uttar Pradesh

Legal Case Details

Despite the presence of four complaints against SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, the outcomes have not been favorable for the builder, as they have lost all the cases brought against them.

1. The appellant claimed illness as the cause for delays in appeal. The tribunal accepted the delay request but required a response from the builder within three days.
2. Several cases focused on procedural issues, with directions issued to the appellants to rectify defects in their appeal records before proceeding.
3. In one occurrence, it was noted that after defects were rectified, the appeal was converted into a regular appeal, showcasing the ongoing legal machinery around the builder but also hinting at procedural roadblocks.

Patterns in Cases Lost

Analyzing the cases lost by SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, we observe a clear trend:

• Consistent Legal Deficiencies: All four cases revealed the builder's inability to mount a successful defense. This pattern suggests a potential lack of robust legal representation or an insufficient response strategy to the claims made against them.
• No Objecting Claims from Respondents: In the cases reviewed, the respondents did not raise formal objections against the builder, which may indicate either a lack of engagement from the builder's side or insufficient effort to counter the claims effectively.

Patterns in Cases Won

Interestingly, no cases were won by SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, thus qualifying the analysis solely to cases lost. The legal proceedings were more centered on procedural rectifications rather than contentious outcomes against claims.

Conclusion

Based on the provided data, SHOURYAPURAM-STPL is facing significant challenges in their legal dealings with a record of four lost cases and no wins. This raises red flags for potential customers contemplating a purchase from this builder.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Research Thoroughly: Before engaging with SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, ensure thorough research into past projects, including reviews and current legal standing.
2. Seek Independent Legal Advice: Consult with a real estate attorney to better understand the implications of previous legal disputes on your potential investment.
3. Consider Company Reputation: A builder's track record speaks volumes about their reliability and service quality. Use available resources to gauge the reputation of the builder in the marketplace.

General Tips for Selecting Any Builder

• Check Legal History: Evaluate the builder's history concerning complaints and legal disputes.
• Visit Previous Projects: If possible, visit completed projects to examine construction quality and customer satisfaction.
• Inquire About Warranties and Services: Ensure the builder offers clear terms regarding warranties and post-purchase services to protect your investment.

In summary, potential buyers should exercise caution and due diligence when contemplating a relationship with SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, given the current legal landscape surrounding the builder.

Analysis of the cases filed against the builder SHOURYAPURAM-STPL, which it lost, revealed several key themes across the various disputes. The cases can be broadly categorized into three types: delay condensation claims, appeal record defects, and compliance with tribunal procedures.

The majority of the cases involved claims related to delays, where the appellant sought condonation for late filings due to reasons like illness. Interestingly, in many instances, the respondent did not object to these delay condonation applications, indicating a degree of disengagement or perhaps acknowledgment of valid reasons for the delays. The tribunal consistently showed leniency in such cases, granting condonations and additional time for the respondents to react.

Another recurring theme was related to defects in the appeal records. The tribunal noted deficiencies that needed to be rectified before proceedings could continue, highlighting the importance of thoroughness and compliance in legal filings. By directing the removal of these defects, the tribunal ensured that cases could progress with due process.

The underlying reason for these legal disputes appears to stem from a combination of factors, including personal circumstances of the appellants and procedural requirements of the tribunal. There was a pattern where appellants would attribute delays to factors outside their control, and the tribunal would consider these reasons favorably. However, the tribunal also emphasized the need for proper compliance with its procedures and timely rectification of any issues in the appeals process.

The builder lost these cases primarily due to insufficient adherence to the tribunal's requirements, both in terms of timely filings and the integrity of the appeal records. The outcomes suggest a systemic issue where the builder may not have prioritized compliance or may have underestimated the rigor required in legal proceedings. Such failures not only necessitate additional steps to rectify defects but also lead to operational inefficiencies and delays in resolving disputes.