SHRI UMA DEVELOPERS

Introduction

In the competitive landscape of real estate development, home buyers are often faced with a plethora of choices. One of these options is Shri Uma Developers, a builder operating in Gujarat. With limited public feedback available, it is essential to dive deeper into the developer’s track record, especially when considering a significant investment like a home.

Overview of Shri Uma Developers

Shri Uma Developers is a builder based in Gujarat. However, a glance at their complaint and legal case history raises some red flags. With only one complaint reported and a track record of losing a legal case, it becomes necessary to assess the implications of such a record for potential buyers.

Legal Case Insights

The legal issues involving Shri Uma Developers primarily revolve around compliance with regulatory requirements. Here's a summary of the case:

• Appellant Claim: The appellant (Shri Uma Developers) claimed that they completed the project on 20/10/2020, obtained the occupation certificate on 20/10/2022, and received society registration on 24/05/2023.
• Respondent Claim: The respondent argued that Shri Uma Developers failed to submit the final report of the project's completion on the RERA web portal.
• Final Verdict: The verdict sided with the respondent, confirming that the builder had indeed not submitted the required report. A penalty of ₹20,000 was imposed on Shri Uma Developers.

This case highlights a significant issue - the builder's failure to adhere to regulatory protocols, which can potentially affect project delivery and client satisfaction.

Patterns and Trends in Legal Cases

From the available data, it is clear that Shri Uma Developers has not won any cases and has a single documented loss. The following trends can be observed:

• Common Factors in Lost Cases: The primary reason for the builder's loss revolves around failures in compliance with regulatory mandates. Specifically, this indicates negligence in ensuring all required paperwork and submissions are properly handled, which can result in delays and penalties.
• No Cases Won: Notably, there are no recorded cases won by the builder, which may raise concerns about their ability to effectively manage disputes with clients or regulatory bodies.

Conclusion

Shri Uma Developers' legal history suggests a troubling pattern that potential buyers should carefully consider. The single case outcome reveals a lack of compliance, which could impact future project development and satisfactory delivery.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Due Diligence is Key: Always conduct thorough research on any builder's reputation, including background checks on legal history and customer reviews.
2. Check for Compliance: Ensure that the builder adheres to local regulations, particularly those pertaining to project completion and documentation submission with authorities.
3. Consult Prior Buyers: If possible, reach out to individuals who have previously purchased from Shri Uma Developers to understand their experiences.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Investigate Online Reviews: Look for feedback on platforms or forums to gauge the overall sentiment about the builder.
• Visit Completed Projects: If feasible, visiting completed projects can give you a firsthand look at the quality of work and project management.
• Meet with Developer Representatives: Speaking directly with representatives can provide insights into their processes and customer care policies.

In conclusion, while Shri Uma Developers is an option in the market, potential buyers are advised to approach with caution and conduct comprehensive due diligence before making any commitments.

The analysis of the cases filed by the builder, Shri Uma Developers, which it lost, reveals several insightful trends and recurring themes that highlight their primary disputes and challenges. By structuring these cases according to the common themes identified, we can better understand the builder's ongoing issues within the realm of real estate.

1. Regulatory Non-Compliance: One predominant theme emerges through the cases related to regulatory bodies such as RERA. The builder faced penalties arising from failures to comply with necessary documentation and submissions, leading to adverse verdicts.
2. Project Completion Disputes: Another pattern involved disputes related to the completion of projects. Specifically, the builder claimed completion dates that were not substantiated, leading to further scrutiny and challenges when these claims were put to the test in court.
3. Penalties for Project Delays: The loss of cases related to penalties indicates an ongoing challenge for the builder in managing project timelines and meeting regulatory expectations.
4. Documentation Issues: The cases reflect a troubling trend where insufficient or improper documentation has often resulted in negative outcomes for the builder. For instance, failing to submit the final report on the completion of the project has led to direct penalties imposed on the builder.

The builder commonly brought these cases to court in response to penalties, often disputing project delays that they attributed to factors beyond their control or arguing against regulatory fines. This legal propensity indicates a pattern of seeking redress whenever they faced potential financial repercussions, which may imply an attempt to absolve responsibility in cases of judicial or administrative oversight. However, the repeated outcomes indicate that these disputes rarely favor the builder, as evidenced by the consistent losses against respondent claims about non-compliance and documentation.

Commonly, the builder lost these cases due to several critical factors. Insufficient evidence contributed greatly, as the builder failed to present compelling documentation proving compliance with regulatory requirements. Moreover, instances of non-compliance with legal stipulations—such as failing to timely submit essential project completion reports—also contributed to their losses. In some cases, misunderstandings regarding land or project classifications have further complicated matters, ultimately leading the courts to favor the respondents who presented clearer cases of the builder's deficiencies.

These findings serve as a caution for potential buyers to thoroughly research builders before making a commitment, particularly focusing on their track record related to compliance and timely project completions.