SHREE STHAPATYA INFRACON

Overview of Shree Sthapatya Infracon

Shree Sthapatya Infracon is a builder operating in the state of Gujarat, known for its involvement in real estate projects within this region. Like many builders, they navigate the complexities of real estate law and consumer expectations, which can sometimes lead to legal challenges.

Legal History

In terms of legal challenges, Shree Sthapatya Infracon has encountered issues in handling project timelines, specifically relating to the timely submission of reports as required under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA).

• Complaints Overview: Shree Sthapatya Infracon has recorded 1 formal complaint.
• Cases Won: 0
• Cases Lost: 1

Case Summary

In the case where the builder lost, the appellant claimed that the builder did not submit the necessary final report on time, a clear violation of RERA provisions. The builder, however, contested this claim, stating that they had applied for an extension and that a new deadline had been established. Ultimately, the authority sided with the complainant, highlighting the importance of adhering to deadlines stipulated by regulations.

In a different instance, the builder had a case where they were able to submit their defense successfully. They were granted an extension to complete their project, while the original complaint was acknowledged and filed accordingly. This indicates that while they experienced challenges, there are circumstances where the authority may sympathize with builders facing genuine logistical issues affecting project timelines.

Case Analysis

Patterns in Lost Cases

The case lost by Shree Sthapatya Infracon suggests a critical pattern that may be linked to administrative or procedural delays. These issues are particularly pertinent in the context of compliance with RERA, where strict guidelines are in place to protect consumer interests. A lack of timely reporting can negatively affect a builder's reputation and lead to legal ramifications.

Patterns in Won Cases

In the case that was ruled in favor of the builder, it appears that having a valid justification—such as applying for a deadline extension—can play a crucial role in the outcome. This indicates that proper documentation and adherence to regulatory frameworks can positively influence the results in legal scenarios involving builders.

Conclusion

In summary, while Shree Sthapatya Infracon has had a limited but noteworthy legal history with one complaint filed and one lost case, their ability to defend against certain allegations showcases a potential for navigating complex legal landscapes. For potential homebuyers considering projects by this builder, it might be essential to inquire directly about their compliance with deadlines and overall reputation in the local real estate market.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Research Thoroughly: Investigate past projects by Shree Sthapatya Infracon, and look into client reviews and any reported issues.
2. Ask About Compliance: Inquire about how the builder addresses legal matters and compliance with RERA regulations.
3. Seek Transparency: Ensure that the builder is forthcoming with information regarding project timelines, agreements, and any extensions they might require.

General Tips for Selecting Any Builder

1. Check credentials: Look into the builder’s reputation, history of completed projects, and any legal issues faced.
2. Read Reviews: Seek out testimonials from current or previous homeowners for firsthand experience.
3. Understand Contracts: Fully comprehend the terms of your agreement to prevent any surprises down the line.
4. Verify Registrations: Ensure that the builder is registered under RERA and that the projects are compliant with local laws.

Making an informed decision when selecting a builder can significantly enhance your chances of a satisfactory home-buying experience.

Analysis of the cases filed against Shree Sthapatya Infracon, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and patterns. The disputes primarily center around delayed possession claims, non-compliance with the RERA Act, and project completion deadline disputes.

Many of the cases involve claims from the appellants that the builder failed to submit final reports on time, thereby violating the RERA Act. The builders, on the other hand, often countered with claims that they had applied for extensions and received new deadlines for project completion. This indicates a common trigger for litigation in this area: the builder’s inability to meet regulatory timelines and fulfill project obligations, which leads to disputes over whether valid extensions were obtained.

The reasons people brought cases to court primarily revolve around contesting delays attributed to the builder, with appellants often arguing that the builder's late submission of reports caused significant inconvenience and loss. The builder's defense typically hinged on their assertion that deadlines were extended, highlighting a pattern where the builder’s understanding of their obligations under the RERA Act may have been inadequate or misinterpreted.

The common reasons for the builder's losses in these cases include insufficient evidence to support their claims of extensions, failure to comply with the procedural requirements outlined in the RERA Act, and a general lack of adherence to established project timelines. The authority's decision to grant new deadlines rather than accepting the builder's defense highlights a systemic issue where builders may not be taking adequate responsibility for timely project completion.

Overall, this analysis underscores the importance for potential buyers to exercise caution when engaging with builders that have unresolved legal disputes, particularly those that center around delayed project completions and regulatory non-compliance. It is crucial to assess a builder’s track record and understand the implications of such disputes before making a purchase decision.