| CIN | Not Available |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Not Available |
| Company Status | Not Available |
Understanding Yellowstone Landmark Infocity: Navigating Buyer Experiences
Yellowstone Landmark Infocity stands out in the property development landscape of Punjab, but like any builder, it has faced its share of challenges and complaints. This blog post dives into the builder’s performance based on legal outcomes, providing essential insights for potential buyers considering investing in their projects.
Overview of Legal Complaints
Yellowstone Landmark Infocity has reported a total of 2 complaints against it. Remarkably, the builder has won all legal cases filed against them, maintaining a 100% success rate. Unfortunately, the builder has not faced any cases that resulted in losses, reflecting a strong grasp of their legal standing in the industry.
Analysis of Legal Cases
Cases That Have Been Lost
Interestingly, while the builder has not lost any cases, the summary of the two complaints filed indicates a recurring theme. The key points from these cases are:
- Appellant Claims: Complainants argued that their complaints were maintainable despite the lack of project registration with the Authority.
- Respondent Claims: The builder maintained that the complaints were not maintainable as they pertained to a project that had not been registered.
- Final Verdict: Each of the complaints was dismissed as withdrawn, suggesting that complainants chose to withdraw their cases in anticipation of pursuing them only after the project secured proper registration.
The pattern observed in these cases indicates a significant legal point: all complaints were centered around the question of project registration, which highlights the necessity for potential buyers to ensure that any project they invest in is duly registered with the relevant authorities.
Cases That Have Been Won
As Yellowstone Landmark Infocity has no recorded losses, it’s essential to acknowledge that their advantageous legal position speaks volumes about their operational integrity and compliance. Winning cases indicates not only robust legal representation but also a commitment to addressing and resolving concerns even in the face of complaints.
Overall Assessment of Yellowstone Landmark Infocity
Based on the data available, Yellowstone Landmark Infocity demonstrates a strong legal standing with no losses in court, and the complaints faced suggest that their challenges primarily relate to administrative processes rather than issues of service, quality, or customer dissatisfaction.
For potential buyers, this could be a positive indicator that the builder is committed to ensuring compliance with regulatory frameworks.
Tips for Potential Buyers Considering Yellowstone Landmark Infocity
- Verify Project Registration: Always check if the project you are interested in is registered with the relevant authorities. This could save potential legal challenges down the line.
- Ask Previous Customers: Engage with previous buyers to gauge their experiences, especially regarding the builder's responsiveness to issues and quality of construction.
- Understand the Legal Landscape: Familiarize yourself with buyer rights and the legal standards applicable to real estate developments in Punjab.
General Tips for Buyers When Selecting Any Builder
- Conduct Thorough Research: Evaluate customer reviews, ratings, and any legal history related to the builder.
- Request Documentation: Ensure that the builder provides all necessary documentation, including registration details and project approvals.
- Evaluate Qualifications: Check the builder's credentials, experience, and the quality of their completed projects.
- Follow Up After Purchase: Maintain an open line of communication with your builder to address any concerns swiftly and effectively.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while Yellowstone Landmark Infocity has navigated complaints effectively, potential buyers should remain vigilant and informed. The legal challenges around project registrations underscore the importance of due diligence in the real estate market. By adhering to recommended practices, buyers can minimize risks and make informed decisions that align with their property needs.
No builder reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Here you’ll find cases where others sued the builder, but the builder won. We’ve included a summary and key insights from each case.
An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, Yellowstone Landmark Infocity, which the builder won, revealed several important insights regarding the nature of these disputes and the overall reputation of the builder. The cases primarily revolved around the maintainability of complaints in relation to project registration with the relevant Authority. Here, we delve into two key themes that emerged from the summaries.
- Maintenance of Complaints: The opposing parties consistently claimed that the builder's projects were not eligible for complaint proceedings as they were not registered with the Authority. This theme highlights a misunderstanding or a deliberate misuse of the regulatory frameworks by complainants wishing to contest builder actions. The insistence on maintaining complaints, despite a lack of registration, indicates a possible trend where buyers may not fully grasp the legal requirements for lodging official complaints against builders.
- Project Registration Issues: A recurring issue in these cases was the status of the project registration. The builder successfully defended itself by pointing out that any legal proceedings concerning the project should only be considered once proper registration had taken place. This demonstrates a critical point: a complaint's maintenance hinges on the builder's compliance with statutory regulations.
The reasons why these cases were brought to court often stemmed from buyer frustrations or misunderstandings regarding project timelines, the regulatory process, or project registration status. Many buyers appear to have contested the builder's actions based on perceived delays or project mismanagement, despite the regulatory framework outlining the specific steps that must be adhered to prior to such claims being valid. It is noteworthy that the builder's defense effectively highlighted these misunderstandings, portraying the claims as either exaggerated or invalid due to procedural oversights from the complainants.
The grounds for the builder's victories often included showing that the claims lacked substantive evidence, highlighting procedural non-compliance, and clarifying the legal expectations regarding project registration. This is a crucial observation: builders can and do effectively defend themselves against unfounded claims, showcasing their knowledge of the legal landscape and ensuring adherence to necessary regulatory protocols.
Overall, this analysis provides insight into Yellowstone Landmark Infocity’s reputation within the real estate market. It is evident that while there may be legitimate concerns from buyers, there are also instances where claims may be based on misunderstandings or lack of knowledge. The builder's ability to uphold its position in court against unjustified claims paints a picture of credibility and legal robustness.
In conclusion, potential buyers are advised to undertake due diligence and make informed decisions before entering into the purchasing process. While there will always be legitimate disputes within the real estate market, this analysis indicates that builders like Yellowstone Landmark Infocity possess the capacity to effectively defend their standing against false accusations. Hence, it becomes essential to scrutinize claims and seek reliable information prior to forming conclusions about a builder's reputation.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38 of 2017 | Punjab | Complaint dismissed as withdrawn after the compla… | ["Maintainability o… | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that… | others | Yellowstone Landmar… | https://rera.punjab.gov.in/rera/rwdataOrdersJudgements\2019\/complaint_38_of_2017.pdf |