Analysis of the cases filed against the builder Shubham Infra, which it lost, revealed significant insights into the builder's operational practices and the grievances of the complainants. The cases primarily revolved around a few common themes, highlighting systemic issues within the builder's management.

The predominant theme among the complaints was the builder's failure to provide proper facilities. In every case, the complainants alleged that Shubham Infra did not deliver adequate drainage systems, lift licenses, and other essential amenities to the residents. This suggests a consistent pattern of neglecting critical responsibilities that ensure the safety and comfort of homeowners.

Closely tied to the lack of facilities was the issue of disputes over service society formation. The complainants repeatedly pointed out that the builder had not formed a service society, which is crucial for managing and maintaining community facilities. This reflects a broader issue of Shubham Infra's failure to engage with the long-term needs of its clients, beyond the initial sale of properties.

Allegations of inadequate drainage systems represent another major concern voiced by the complainants. Proper drainage is vital for preventing hazards and ensuring the integrity of the buildings. The builder's inability to meet this standard raises questions about its adherence to construction quality norms and regulatory requirements.

Finally, the theme of contested maintenance deposits and licensing indicates a significant communication gap between the builder and the residents. In each case, the builder claimed that the complainants had not paid the required maintenance deposit, while also asserting that lift licenses had been renewed. This discrepancy highlights an issue of transparency and trust in the relationship between Shubham Infra and its clients.

The reasons for these disputes largely center around the builder's failure to fulfill its contractual obligations, resulting in dissatisfaction among residents. The common triggers for litigation include the builder's neglect of essential facilities, inadequate communication regarding maintenance requirements, and the absence of a service society to address grievances.

The builder lost these cases primarily due to its inability to meet the necessary standards for providing a safe and well-maintained living environment. Factors contributing to the losses include:

• Insufficient evidence to counter the claims made by the complainants,
• Non-compliance with legal requirements for drainage systems and service societies, and
• Mismanagement of maintenance deposits and licensing, which led to confusion and mistrust among the residents.

Overall, this analysis underscores the importance of thorough due diligence when considering properties developed by Shubham Infra. Buyers should be cautious and weigh the systemic issues highlighted in these cases against the potential risks before making a purchase.

The analysis of the cases filed by the builder Shubham Infra, which it lost, reveals significant insights into the challenges and conflicts faced by this construction entity. The cases primarily revolve around three key themes: Regulatory Non-compliance, Penalties for Violations, and Project Reporting Issues.

1. Regulatory Non-compliance: One of the most noteworthy recurring themes is the builder's failure to comply with regulatory requirements, particularly in regard to timely submissions of necessary reports. In this specific case, the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority highlighted that Shubham Infra did not provide quarterly reports mandated by law for their project 'Shubham Elite'. Non-compliance with such regulations not only leads to penalties but also raises questions about the builder's operational integrity and project management practices.
2. Penalties for Violations: The builder faced financial penalties as a consequence of its actions, when the regulatory authority imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 for its regulatory lapses. This serves as a critical reminder that in the real estate sector, adherence to established laws and guidelines is paramount, and penalties can have direct financial implications that impact the builder's reputation.
3. Project Reporting Issues: The case underscores the importance of robust documentation and reporting within the construction sector. Shubham Infra's failure in submitting required reports reflects a lack of attention to compliance, which can trigger legal disputes and adversely affect relations with regulatory bodies.

The reasons for Shubham Infra's litigation appear to stem from attempts to contest penalties and justify mistakes. The builder claimed leniency for its mistakes, which highlights a possible strategy to mitigate penalties rather than a commitment to correcting compliance issues. Analyzing these patterns suggests that operational mismanagement and a failure to heed regulatory requirements were critical factors that led to the builder’s adverse outcomes in court.

Ultimately, the analysis of lost cases showcases a prevailing theme: the significance of regulatory adherence and diligent project management. Shubham Infra's difficulties emphasize the essential nature of maintaining operational standards and the repercussions that arise from negligence. Potential buyers should evaluate builders not only on their promotional promises but also on their historical compliance records to ensure they are engaging with reliable and accountable entities.

An analysis of the cases filed by the builder, SHUBHAM INFRA, which it won, revealed the following information. The cases primarily revolved around three common themes: Facilities and Services Disputes, Maintenance Payment Issues, and Licensing Compliance. Each of these themes pointed to specific areas of contention between SHUBHAM INFRA and the complainants.

1. Facilities and Services Disputes: The builder faced allegations related to the non-provision of necessary amenities, including a proper drainage system, lift licenses, and the establishment of a service society for the residents. Such disputes often arise when clients expect a certain level of services that they believe are standard within the promised project framework.
2. Maintenance Payment Issues: Another recurring theme was related to maintenance charges. The respondents, in this case, argued that the complainants had failed to pay the necessary maintenance deposit, suggesting that financial disputes often accompany either claims of service insufficiency or delays.
3. Licensing Compliance: The case also highlighted issues regarding licensing, particularly the renewal of the lift license, which the builder contended had been fulfilled.

The builder typically brought these cases to court as a means to contest penalties, counter disputes surrounding project delays attributed to external factors, and assert compliance with regulatory requirements. Patterns in litigation suggest that claims from buyers often stemmed from misunderstandings or miscommunications regarding the scope of service provisions.

Common reasons for the builder's success in these legal battles included insufficient evidence provided by the opposing party, instances of non-compliance with legal or contractual obligations by the complainants, and clear documentation showing that the builder adhered to licensing regulations and other requirements. In many situations, SHUBHAM INFRA effectively defended itself against what appeared to be false or exaggerated claims from buyers.

This analysis sheds light on the builder’s reputation in the broader real estate market. It’s evident that buyers can sometimes make false accusations, leading to unnecessary legal confrontations. SHUBHAM INFRA has proven itself resilient in facing these unjust claims, thereby reinforcing its standing as a reputable builder.

In conclusion, potential buyers should take away the importance of making informed decisions in the real estate market. While substantive disputes do exist, the analysis of SHUBHAM INFRA's cases indicates that the builder has often been in a position to effectively defend itself against unfounded allegations. As such, buyers are encouraged to approach claims meticulously and seek reliable information before forming opinions about a builder's reputation.