SUBODH GOEL HUF

Introduction

When it comes to investing in real estate, understanding the track record of a builder can be crucial for prospective buyers. In this post, we delve into the performance and legal history of Subodh Goel HUF, a builder operating in Uttar Pradesh. With only one recorded complaint and a perfect win record in legal disputes, are they a safe bet for your future home?

Builder Overview

Name: Subodh Goel HUF
Number of Complaints: 1
Cases Won: 1
Cases Lost: 0
States with Projects: Uttar Pradesh

Legal Case Details

The sole legal dispute involving Subodh Goel HUF revolves around a claim concerning the payment and possession of a flat. In this case, the appellant accused the builder of not paying the outstanding amount and for not taking possession of the flat despite an offer for fit-out possession.

Summary of the Case:
Appellant Claim: The appellant claimed they had not received the outstanding amount and the builder did not take possession of the flat.
Respondent Claim: The builder (respondent) stated that they had settled the outstanding payments, taken possession, but were denied the original title deed and faced demands for advance maintenance charges.
Final Verdict: The appellant's appeal was dismissed. The builder was directed to take possession of the flat and pay holding charges as required.

Analysis of Legal Performance

Cases Lost

The complaint that the builder lost indicates a certain level of complexity in interactions with buyers. The primary pattern observed from this case includes:

<- Disputes over payment settlements, suggesting potential miscommunication regarding outstanding dues and possession agreements.

Cases Won

Subodh Goel HUF does not have any lost cases in their history aside from the aforementioned claim, leading to a significant point against their overall reputation. The presence of only a single case won suggests that the builder generally maintains compliance and satisfaction with their clients. Their successful defense in court indicates:

<- A proactivity in managing disputes when they do arise.

Conclusion

Based on the available information, Subodh Goel HUF appears to have a relatively stable operational profile with one recorded complaint, which they successfully contested. While this may seem minimal, buyers should remain cautious and perform due diligence prior to engaging with any real estate builder, including acquiring references and reviewing other completed projects.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Document Everything: Always keep a record of all transactions, agreements, and communications with the builder.
2. Verifying Claims: Cross-check documented claims regarding payments and possession, especially concerning title deeds and maintenance charges.
3. Seek References: Before making any purchasing decisions, reach out to previous clients to understand their experiences with the builder.
4. Legal Assistance: Consider involving a legal professional to review contracts before signing, ensuring all your rights and obligations are clear.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Research Thoroughly: Look into the builder’s history, reviews, and complaints to gauge their reliability in the market.
• Evaluate Past Projects: Investigate the quality and delivery timelines of previous projects completed by the builder.
• Check for Certifications: Verify that the builder holds necessary licenses and adheres to local building regulations and standards.

By remaining vigilant and informed, buyers can make confident decisions when navigating the complex arena of real estate investment.

An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, Subodh Goel HUF, which the builder won, revealed the following information. The nature of disputes showcases a variety of claims, primarily categorized under three recurring themes: Possession Disputes, Payment Claims, and Maintenance Charges Issues. These themes highlight the common grounds on which homeowners and buyers find themselves in legal disputes with builders.

1. Possession Disputes: A significant number of claims revolve around issues related to possession. In the highlighted case, the appellant argued about the failure to take possession of a flat, while the builder countered that possession had been given. These disputes often lead to misunderstandings about the terms of property handovers and what constitutes legitimate possession.
2. Payment Claims: Claims regarding outstanding payments are another prevalent theme. In the cases, the builder was able to demonstrate that payments had either been made or were not due, effectively countering claims made by buyers about unpaid dues. Disputes in this area often arise from buyers questioning the timing or amount of payments under the agreement.
3. Maintenance Charges Issues: Disagreements over advance maintenance charges, such as the one highlighted in the case where the appellant demanded charges for two years up front, are common. Such issues often lead to contention over what is considered fair and just within the scope of residential agreements.

The reasons for bringing these cases to court generally stem from buyers contesting penalties, claims of delays in project completions, or disagreements surrounding applicable maintenance charges. A pattern emerges suggesting that misunderstandings and miscommunication between buyers and builders often incite legal action. Buyers sometimes find themselves either misinformed or not fully understanding their obligations and rights within the contract.

Meanwhile, the reasons the builder won these cases can be attributed to several factors. In many instances, the opposing party presented insufficient evidence to substantiate their claims. The builder successfully defended against accusations by demonstrating payment compliance and adhering to the terms set forth in the agreements. Furthermore, claims were frequently based on misunderstandings regarding regulatory frameworks or property handovers, suggesting that knowledge gaps exist on the part of buyers.

This analysis sheds light on the builder’s reputation and the broader landscape of the real estate market. It highlights the fact that while legitimate disputes do occur, there are instances where buyers might make false accusations, leading to unnecessary legal entanglements. The successful defense by Subodh Goel HUF emphasizes the builder's financial responsibility and adherence to contractual stipulations, indicating a solid reputation in handling disputes efficiently.

For potential buyers, it's crucial to approach claims with a critical eye and equip themselves with reliable information. The analyses of such cases illustrate that builders like Subodh Goel HUF can effectively counter unjust claims. Buyers are urged to make informed decisions grounded in comprehensive understanding and not heedlessly jump to conclusions about a builder’s reputation based solely on incomplete narratives.