SUKHAM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED

Introduction

In the realm of real estate, understanding a builder's track record can provide invaluable insight into their reliability and quality of service. Sukham Infrastructure Private Limited, operating in Punjab, is one such entity worth analyzing. With a proactive approach toward legal accountability, this builder has faced several complaints, all while sustaining a clean slate in terms of case losses. In this post, we delve into Sukham Infrastructure's legal journey, focusing on complaints filed against them, the outcomes of these cases, and what potential buyers should consider when evaluating them.

Legal Case Overview

Sukham Infrastructure Private Limited has faced a total of three legal complaints, all of which have culminated in favorable outcomes for the builder—it has won all three cases. Here’s a brief breakdown of the cases:

1. Case Summary - Project Registration: In the first two cases, the central issue revolved around whether the complaints were maintainable since the projects involved were not registered with the relevant Authority. Both cases were dismissed after the complainant expressed the desire to withdraw their complaints and file fresh ones once registration was achieved.
2. Case Summary - Development Complaints: The third case involved allegations of incomplete development works and denial of timely possession. However, this complaint was also dismissed as not maintainable due to the same issue of project registration.

Patterns in Legal Outcomes

Lost Cases Patterns

Across the three complaints, a notable pattern emerges: they were all dismissed on the grounds related to the maintainability of the complaints. The recurring claim from Sukham Infrastructure's side highlighted a fundamental requirement—the necessity for project registration with the Authority. The consistent theme here is that the lack of proper registration was the tipping point leading to the dismissal of these complaints. Therefore, while the builder has navigated these legal challenges successfully, it emphasizes the importance of adhering to local regulations in housing development.

Winning Cases Patterns

As for the cases won, Sukham Infrastructure has a perfect score of winning all cases filed against them. This speaks volumes regarding their legal strategy and the soundness of their claims pertaining to project registration and the legitimacy of the complaints. Each time, the builder maintained that the complaints were not valid due to the lack of proper registration, which ultimately led to the dismissal of the claims.

Conclusion

In summary, Sukham Infrastructure Private Limited exhibits a robust legal standing, managing to win every case filed against them. Potential buyers should consider the implications of the builder's project registration status and how it relates to their own rights and responsibilities in the purchasing process.

Tips for Potential Buyers

1. Check Project Registration: Always verify whether the project is registered with relevant authorities to ensure your compliance and protection.
2. Understand the Legal Framework: Familiarize yourself with the real estate laws in your area to avoid complications later in the process.
3. Research the Builder's Track Record: Look into not only the complaint history but also the outcomes to get a full picture of how the builder handles disputes.

General Tips for Selecting A Builder

• Investigate Customer Feedback: Engage with previous buyers and check online reviews for firsthand experiences.
• Evaluate Financial Stability: Ensure the builder has the financial capacity to complete ongoing projects.
• Seek Transparency: A reputable builder should provide clear documentation and be willing to answer all inquiries regarding the project.

Choosing the right builder can significantly impact your home buying experience. By considering the insights above, potential buyers can make more informed decisions and ultimately choose a builder that meets their expectations.

An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, Sukham Infrastructure Private Limited, which the builder won, revealed the following information:

1. Maintainability of Complaints: A recurring theme in these cases was the question of whether the complaints filed were even maintainable in court. Most claims revolved around projects that were not registered with the governing authority, which precluded legal action. Opposing parties argued that their complaints were valid regardless of this registration status, but the court upheld the builder's defense that without proper registration, such complaints could not be entertained.
2. Claims of Incomplete Development Works: In one case, the complainant specifically criticized Sukham Infrastructure for alleged incomplete development works and a lack of supporting services. However, this complaint met with preliminary objections concerning the maintainability and ultimately faced rejection because, once again, the project lacked required registration.
3. Timely Possession Disputes: While there was an assertion regarding timely possession, it appears that such claims were entangled with the primary issue of project registration, which led to their dismissal. The courts seem to have viewed these possession claims as secondary, reinforcing their earlier decisions regarding maintainability.

The reasons why these cases were brought to court include contesting penalties for non-compliance, claims of project delays, and assertions that the builder failed to deliver on promised timelines and services. Notably, common patterns indicate that buyers or regulatory bodies often filed complaints believing they had legitimate grounds, only to encounter legal hurdles regarding project registration and maintainability.

The common reasons the builder won these cases reflect a well-prepared defense against claims that lacked substantial evidence. For example, the builder cited non-compliance with legal requirements on the part of the complainants, which proved beneficial when judgments leaned towards dismissing cases where preliminary objections were upheld. Furthermore, misunderstandings regarding land or project classification rules seem to have been a barrier for the complainants, often leading to confusion as to the legality of their complaints.

These insights provide a glimpse into the reputation of Sukham Infrastructure Private Limited within the broader real estate market. The successful defense against these disputes suggests that the builder not only understands legal intricacies but also maintains a rigorous adherence to regulatory standards. This underscores a potential pattern where buyers, driven by frustration, sometimes raise claims that can be perceived as false or exaggerated, leading to unnecessary legal escalations.

In conclusion, potential buyers should recognize the importance of making informed decisions when navigating the complexities of real estate transactions. While legitimate disputes certainly exist, this analysis reveals that builders like Sukham Infrastructure Private Limited can often effectively defend themselves against unwarranted accusations. It is crucial for buyers to approach claims against builders cautiously and seek reliable information to form balanced opinions regarding their reputations.