SRUSHTI SANGAM PRIVATE LIMITED

Introduction

In the competitive real estate market, choosing the right builder is crucial for ensuring a smooth and satisfactory home-buying experience. Today, we take a closer look at Srushti Sangam Private Limited, a builder operating in Maharashtra. This analysis draws on their legal history and performance metrics to help potential buyers make informed decisions.

Overview of Srushti Sangam Private Limited

Srushti Sangam Private Limited is a real estate builder based in Maharashtra, with a track record marred by one notable complaint leading to a legal case. While the company has undertaken engineering projects, it has faced significant challenges concerning delivery commitments.

Legal Case Analysis

Srushti Sangam has been involved in two key legal cases:

1. Case Won: In this instance, the complainant sought compensation due to delayed possession and also claimed rent for the period of delay. The builder contended that the delays were caused by unforeseen factors beyond their control. The verdict favored the builder in terms of compensation for rent; however, they were required to compensate the complainant for the delay in possession through interest.
2. Case Lost: In comparison, the sole case that resulted in a complaint against Srushti Sangam ended with the builder losing. The absence of further details makes it challenging to delineate patterns; however, one recognized aspect is the builder's consistent claims regarding uncontrollable delays.

Patterns in Cases Lost

The case where Srushti Sangam lost demonstrates a potential pattern where complaints arise predominantly around possession delays, indicating a need for improved project management and communication regarding timelines. Such delays can create discontent among buyers and lead to formal complaints.

Patterns in Cases Won

Conversely, in the case won by Srushti Sangam, the ruling did not completely absolve the builder; rather it suggested that issues around delayed possession can still result in legal complexities. The builder did not successfully mitigate the claim for rent, pointing to an area where they could improve in addressing buyer concerns and expectations upfront.

Conclusion

Overall, Srushti Sangam Private Limited's limited history of complaints and the outcomes of its legal challenges suggest some caution for potential buyers. The pattern of delayed possession claims indicates a critical area for attention. Prospective homeowners should take these factors into account when considering Srushti Sangam as their builder.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Research Thoroughly: Before purchasing, investigate the builder's track record and look for complaints or legal issues. While Srushti Sangam only has one complaint on record, the details are telling.
2. Understand Your Rights: Familiarize yourself with consumer rights in real estate, especially concerning delays in possession and compensation.
3. Communicate Clearly: Make sure to communicate your expectations regarding timelines and delivery. Documentation is key to handling any disputes that may arise.

General Tips for Selecting Any Builder

1. Check Credentials: Always verify the credentials and reputation of a builder through reviews and past project performance.
2. Visit Completed Projects: Evaluate existing properties developed by the builder to get a firsthand understanding of their construction quality and aesthetics.
3. Seek Legal Advice: Consider consulting with a real estate attorney to understand potential risks and ensure that your interests are protected during the buying process.

By staying informed and vigilant, buyers can navigate the complexities of real estate purchases more effectively.

Analysis of the cases filed against Srushti Sangam Private Limited, where the builder lost, reveals several key themes and patterns. The primary disputes can be categorized into two main topics: Delayed Possession Claims and Disputes over Project Delays.

The cases often revolved around the builder's failure to deliver possession on time, prompting complainants to seek compensation for the delay and rent they incurred while waiting. For instance, in one notable case, the complainant claimed compensation for delayed possession and rent, while the builder defended itself by attributing the delays to various unforeseen circumstances. Ultimately, the authority granted interest on the delayed possession but denied the rent claim, indicating a degree of validity in the complaints regarding delays.

Common reasons for bringing cases to court included contesting penalties imposed for delays, disputing the builder's claims of unavoidable project delays, and disagreements over classifications that might affect project timelines. A consistent pattern emerged where the builder faced litigation primarily due to delays, which suggests that project timeline management may be a significant weakness for Srushti Sangam Private Limited.

The builder lost these cases chiefly due to insufficient evidence to support their claims of extenuating circumstances. While they often cited factors beyond their control for the delays, the decisions made by the governing authorities indicate that the builder's defenses were inadequate, leading to a lack of traction in their arguments. Furthermore, the builder's limited success in these cases might highlight a broader issue of non-compliance with legal or regulatory requirements governing real estate development, which could be a concern for potential buyers.