TULIVE VIHA APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION

Introduction

The Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association, located in Tamil Nadu, has recently been under scrutiny due to legal challenges arising from complaints against the builder. This blog post aims to shed light on the complaints filed against them, the outcomes of these cases, and what potential buyers should consider before purchasing property from this builder.

Overview of Legal Complaints

According to the data, the Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association has recorded a total of two complaints. Unfortunately, the outcomes of these cases were not favorable for the builder, as they lost both cases.

Legal Case Details

1. Case 1: The complainant expressed concerns that the respondent had unlawfully sold a portion of the common area without proper authorization. They sought relief to transfer the corpus fund and register the project under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA). The builder's claim was that the project was completed in 2017, which suggested that it was not ongoing, and that the complainant lacked the standing to file the complaint. However, the Authority ruled in favor of the complainant, holding the complaint maintainable and recognizing the project as ongoing.
2. Case 2: In another situation, a complainant alleged that the builder sold portions of common areas to two flat owners without informing other owners. The builder argued that the sale was legitimate and that the flat owners had agreed not to impede the rights of their fellow owners. Once again, the authority found decisively against the builder, declaring the sale of the common area null and void, and directed the builder to rectify the sale deeds.

Patterns in Cases Lost

Both cases lost by the Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association revolved around the improper handling of common areas. In each instance, the builder faced complaints related to unauthorized sales of shared property portions. The outcomes reveal a pattern of the builder failing to properly communicate and manage the rights of all unit owners, illustrating a serious oversight in adhering to community association standards and regulations.

Patterns in Cases Won

It's important to note that while the builder has not won any legal cases, they mounted a defense claiming that the project was completed and thus should not be classified as ongoing. However, as both cases were ruled against them, there are no successful defense patterns to highlight at this time.

Conclusion

In summary, the Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association has faced legal challenges that underline significant issues of compliance and governance. The loss of two legal cases regarding the sale of common areas suggests a lack of transparency and accountability by the builder in their dealings with unit owners. This raises concerns for potential buyers about the builder’s commitment to maintaining the integrity of community living.

Tips for Potential Buyers

• Conduct Thorough Research: Before purchasing, investigate the builder’s past legal history and understand any complaints against them.
• Understand Property Governance: Familiarize yourself with how common areas are managed and whom to approach with concerns.
• Seek Clarity on Community Rules: Ensure that you receive comprehensive documentation on community regulations, especially regarding common areas.

General Tips for Selecting a Builder

• Check for Credentials: Ensure that the builder is registered and licensed, and that they adhere to local building regulations.
• Review Previous Projects: Look into past projects to assess quality and reliability.
• Talk to Current Residents: If possible, speak with residents of communities built by the developer to gauge their satisfaction and any issues they might have faced.

In conclusion, while Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association has attractive offerings, potential buyers should proceed with caution and due diligence before making any commitments.

Analysis of the cases filed against Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association, where the builder lost, reveals significant insights into the nature of disputes associated with residential projects. The cases highlight three recurring themes: Common Area Disputes, Locus Standi and Project Classification, and Regulatory Compliance and Authorization.

The first type of dispute involves allegations of improper dealings with common areas. In two cases, the complainants asserted that the builder had sold portions of the common area without adequate authorization or disclosure to other owners. This raises a pattern of concern among residents regarding the transparency and accountability of builders when handling shared spaces. The authority's decision to nullify the sale of common area indicates a legal recognition of the importance of maintaining the integrity of these shared regions.

The second theme revolves around the builder's claims of completed projects and the corresponding loss of regulatory oversight. In one case, the builder contended that since the project was completed in 2017, it was not subject to ongoing regulatory requirements. However, the authority determined that the project was indeed ongoing and that the complainants had the right to seek remedies under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority. This highlights an important consideration for buyers regarding the classification of projects and the implications for their legal protections.

Finally, the theme of regulatory compliance and authorization stands out in both cases. The builder's failures to secure proper authorization for the sale of common areas or to register the project appropriately with the RERA led directly to the losses in litigation. This underlines a crucial pattern: non-compliance with regulatory requirements is a common trigger for litigation in residential projects and typically leads to unfavorable outcomes for builders.

In summary, the cases against Tulive Viha Apartment Owners Association serve as a warning to potential buyers about the importance of scrutinizing a builder's handling of common areas, project classification, and adherence to regulatory standards. Buyers should be cautious and informed, as the patterns observed in these cases could indicate broader issues in the builder's operational practices.