Under the agreement, the owners` right of consideration was obtained only with the obtaining of the necessary authorizations and authorizations for the development of the property. In fact, no permission was ultimately obtained, as the High Court banned the development. . argued that the development contract is not registered and that the remedy is time-barred. It is stated that the possession was handed over on 16/08/09 and the notice of claim of. the basis of the unregreg registered agreement as well as the dwellings sold to other buyers. Such an act would prevent the OPs from calling into question the unregreg registered development agreement. That`s right. The objections of the applicant for review to the unreg registered development agreement are not acceptable. It was explicitly supported by the Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner that the. In addition, the developers provided only part of the consideration and the taxpayers therefore proposed to tax the proportional amount received. However, the JDA was later abandoned, as the necessary authorizations for development were not issued. .
The complainant`s main case is that the complainant concluded an unreg registered agreement of 30.09.2014 for development with O.P. No.1, which is professional and via. Force of such an unreg registered development agreement, the two parties agreed, in accordance with the terms of the act, to develop and promote the country with a size of about 3 Cottah 20 Sq.ft under Mouza Kodalia. Construction of the complainant and it was agreed by the aforementioned agreement that the O.P.R. would give. . . .