CIN | U70200KL2012PTC030293 |
---|---|
Year Established | 18-Jan-12 |
Address | 29/208 B, KOUSHTUBHAM, LANE NO 28, JANATHA ROAD, VYTTILA P O KOCHI KL 682019 IN |
Company Status | Private |
When it comes to choosing a builder for your dream home or investment property, conducting thorough research is crucial. This post focuses on Signature Dwellings Private Limited, a builder active in Karnataka, to provide potential buyers with insights into their operations based on complaint records and case outcomes.
Signature Dwellings Private Limited has registered a total of two complaints against it. Unfortunately, the builder has not won any legal cases related to these complaints, indicating a concerning track record in terms of customer satisfaction and dispute resolution. Here’s a deeper look into the specifics of these cases and the implications for prospective buyers.
From these outcomes, it is clear that while the builder did not win the cases outright, they were ordered to comply with certain regulations and requirements, reflecting an acknowledgment of some grievances presented by the complainants.
Based on the data presented, Signature Dwellings Private Limited carries a questionable reputation from a legal perspective, given the lack of any cases won and the nature of the complaints against them. Potential buyers should approach with caution, ensuring they thoroughly review agreements and represent their needs clearly.
While Signature Dwellings Private Limited continues to operate within Karnataka, the cautionary notes presented in this article are vital for anyone considering investing their hard-earned money in a property with this builder.
No builder reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Here you’ll find cases where others sued the builder, and the builder lost. We’ve included a simple summary and key takeaways from each case.
Analysis of the cases filed against Signature Dwellings Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and key patterns in the disputes presented. The cases primarily revolve around two main topics: charges based on the super built-up area and defective parking provisions, both of which highlight significant issues in the builder's adherence to accepted practices and regulatory compliance.
The first theme, concerning charges based on the super built-up area, indicates a major point of contention between the builder and the complainants. The complainants claimed that they were charged for the super built-up area rather than the carpet area, which is the actual usable space within the property. This raises a critical issue about transparency and ethical billing practices in real estate transactions.
The second theme, regarding defective parking provisions, shows another failure on the part of the builder to meet the expectations and legal requirements set by the Bangalore Municipal Building Bye-laws (BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003). The complainants reported receiving inadequate parking, which reflects a common problem in rapidly urbanizing areas where parking space is at a premium.
The verdicts in these cases mandate the builder to rectify the parking situation and transfer common areas to the association of allottees once formed, thereby emphasizing the need for builders to consider community needs and comply with regulatory frameworks.
A pattern emerges from these summaries: the builder’s losses are primarily due to a combination of overcharging based on misleading space calculations and non-compliance with established building bylaws. There was also a lack of responsiveness to the complainants' legitimate concerns regarding parking and common area allocations.
The builder's defense consistently cited the signed agreement of sale, indicating a reliance on contractual obligations rather than a commitment to customer satisfaction or legal compliance. This highlights a significant concern for potential buyers who must weigh the risks associated with a builder's past legal issues when considering a purchase.
Overall, these cases serve as a crucial warning for prospective buyers to conduct thorough research and ensure that builders are transparent, compliant with regulations, and respectful of contractual obligations before making any commitments.
This table provides an analysis of individual cases that contributed to the summary above. Click on any row to expand and view complete details, and use the "Show More" button to load additional rows as needed.
Case Number | State | Summary | Case Topic | Detailed Summary | Appellant Name | Respondent Name | Source |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMP/220408/0009335 | Karnataka | Complaint against M/s SIGNATURE DWELLINGS PRIVATE… | ["Defective parking… | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claim that … | SIGNATURE DWELLINGS… | https://rera.karnataka.gov.in/reraDocument?DOC=3380779 |