Analysis of the cases filed against Shubh Developers, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes across the disputes. The cases can be broadly categorized into three types: non-compliance with regulatory requirements, penalties for delayed submissions, and personal/family responsibility claims.

The first type involves the builder's failure to adhere to legal standards, particularly concerning project reporting. In one case, the respondent admitted to not submitting quarterly reports as mandated by law, citing ignorance of the regulations. This highlights a troubling pattern where the builder’s lack of familiarity with regulatory obligations led to serious violations.

The second category encompasses penalties imposed for late submissions of essential documentation, including annual audit reports. In two separate instances, the authority fined Shubh Developers Rs. 40,000 for failing to submit these reports on time. The builder's defenses in these cases revolved around personal and family responsibilities, which suggests that they may have been overwhelmed by external pressures. However, these reasons did not resonate with the governing body, which prioritized compliance over personal circumstances.

The common thread among these cases is the builder’s consistent non-compliance with critical regulatory requirements. People brought cases to court primarily to contest the penalties imposed for these violations or to address the builder’s accountability for delayed projects. The patterns emerging from these disputes indicate that Shubh Developers faced scrutiny due to a fundamental failure to understand and adhere to the necessary rules and timelines, coupled with a reliance on personal responsibility claims that did not stand in a legal context.

Ultimately, the builder lost these cases due to insufficient evidence to support their claims of mitigating circumstances, alongside clear-cut instances of non-compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. This underscores the importance for builders to prioritize regulatory adherence and maintain open communication with authorities to prevent similar outcomes in the future.

The analysis of the cases filed by the builder, SHUBH DEVELOPERS, that they lost reveals some critical insights into their legal challenges and operational behavior. The primary themes identified in these cases include Regulatory Non-compliance, Penalties for Unauthorized Sales, and Disputes over Project Registration. Each theme reflects underlying issues that may affect buyer trust and project integrity.

1. Regulatory Non-compliance: In the examined case, SHUBH DEVELOPERS faced serious regulatory non-compliance claims. Specifically, the builder's failure to register their project with RERA (Real Estate Regulatory Authority) before selling units was a key issue. This violation demonstrates that the builder did not adhere to essential legal requirements aimed at protecting buyers and ensuring accountability in real estate transactions.
2. Penalties for Unauthorized Sales: The case indicated that SHUBH DEVELOPERS engaged in the sale of units worth over Rs. 18 Crores without proper registration, leading to significant penalties. This suggests that the builder may have prioritized profit over compliance, potentially endangering buyers' investments and undermining market trust.
3. Disputes over Project Registration: The builder claimed to have initiated project development and sought registration as an ongoing project. However, the regulatory body found this insufficient due to the absence of required documentation and timely compliance. This indicates a problematic approach to project management and a lack of understanding of the regulatory landscape.

Common patterns emerge from SHUBH DEVELOPERS' approach to litigation. The builder frequently contest penalties, often attributing project delays and regulatory issues to external factors. This suggests a tendency to deflect responsibility instead of taking ownership of compliance failures. However, the outcomes of their cases indicate that the authorities were not swayed by these arguments, often ruling against the builder due to their own non-compliance.

The reasons for the builder's losses predominantly stem from insufficient evidence to support their claims, a lack of adherence to legal requirements, and failure to follow interim directions issued by regulatory bodies. This highlights a crucial lesson for buyers: a builder's compliance record and legal standing are essential indicators of overall reliability and commitment to ethical business practices. In light of these findings, potential buyers should approach SHUBH DEVELOPERS with caution, considering their track record in the face of regulatory obligations.

This dictionary organizes key themes in the builder's legal issues and presents an insightful summary that analyzes the cases while being accessible for a blog audience.