SHREM CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED

Introduction

Shrem Construction Private Limited is a builder operating primarily in Maharashtra, India. Buyers looking for information about this builder may find it essential to understand their legal standing and history concerning client complaints and court cases. With only one recorded complaint against them and no cases won, evaluating their reliability and accountability is critical for potential buyers.

Company Overview

Shrem Construction has gained its presence in the construction sector with a focus on projects within Maharashtra. However, any potential setbacks in their legal dealings could reflect on their operational integrity and impact buyer trust.

Legal Case Details

The legal information surrounding Shrem Construction Private Limited indicates that they have faced scrutiny based on a particular complaint:

• Number of Complaints: 1
• Cases Won: 0
• Cases Lost: 1

In the one case filed against them, the details indicate that they did not succeed. The court allowed the application for condonation of delay, indicating that while the builder's procedural compliance was acknowledged, it doesn't suggest a favorable resolution for them in terms of reputation or accountability.

Analysis of Legal Patterns

Cases Lost

• Outcome: Shrem Construction has lost one case, which could suggest potential deficiencies in their operational practices or compliance standards.
• Common Factors: Given that there have been no cases won, this signifies a potential issue in addressing customer grievances or legal obligations satisfactorily.

Cases Won

• Outcomes: The single case where the builder morphed from a respondent's position pertained to procedural elements rather than a decisive victory, implying limited effectiveness in combating client grievances substantively.
• Common Factors: The nature of the builder's engagement in legal cases shows a tendency towards procedural motions rather than resolving core service disputes, which may raise concerns for future clients seeking accountability.

Conclusion

Shrem Construction Private Limited’s legal track record, characterized by a single complaint and no successful defenses, presents a cautious picture for potential buyers. It reflects a need for vigilance when considering them as a builder for your construction needs. Buyers looking to invest in properties by Shrem Construction should weigh this legal history carefully.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Research Thoroughly: Always investigate a builder's history, including client experiences and legal records, before making a substantial investment.
2. Request References: Ask for testimonials or case studies from previous clients to understand their experiences.
3. Legal Consultation: Consider seeking legal advice before finalizing any contracts, particularly for builders with noted complaints or unresolved legal issues.

General Tips for Selecting Any Builder

1. Check Credentials: Ensure the builder is licensed and has all the necessary approvals for the projects.
2. Evaluate Previous Projects: Visit completed projects to assess quality and craftsmanship.
3. Understand Warranty Terms: Be clear about the warranty terms offered to protect your investment.
4. Open Communication: Choose a builder who is transparent and maintains open lines of communication.

By applying these considerations and tips, buyers can navigate their home construction or purchasing journey more confidently, minimizing potential risks associated with builder engagements.

Analysis of the cases filed against Shrem Construction Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes across the disputes. The cases can be broadly categorized into two main topics: Delayed Possession Claims and Pleadings and Procedural Delays.

The first type of cases involves claims primarily related to delays in possession of properties. Although the specifics of the delays were not outlined in the summary, it is important to note that delays in possession are a common source of friction between builders and buyers. Buyers often rely on timely possession to move into their new homes or to rent them out, and a delay can result in significant emotional and financial strain.

The second category revolves around pleadings and procedural delays. The sole example provided in the summary indicates that the builder sought condonation of delay in preferring the appeal, while the respondent sought time to file a reply and complete pleadings. This highlights a pattern where cases may not stem from the underlying issues of the project itself but rather from the procedural aspects of the litigation process.

A common trigger for the builder’s litigation appears to be related to delays—either delays in possession or delays in the legal proceedings themselves. Buyers may contest penalties imposed for these delays or dispute the builder's claims of responsibility for the delays. In the case of Shrem Construction, the application for condonation of delay was allowed, indicating that the builder faced challenges related to adherence to legal timelines, which is critical in resolving disputes efficiently.

The builder lost these cases primarily due to procedural reasons. The allowance of the application for condonation of delay suggests that the builder faced issues related to timely filing and adherence to the legal process. While insufficient evidence or non-compliance with legal requirements could also be potential reasons for the outcomes, the provided summary highlights the importance of procedural compliance in legal disputes involving builders.