12. On January 7, 2015, the petitioner sent a notice to counsel for the respondent indicating that the petitioner wished to appoint a new promoter who intended to invent the company`s assets and act in accordance with the December 23, 2014 decision. The petitioner asked the respondent to immediately stop promoting the petitioner`s proposed remedy via its website. The petitioner filed the petition on February 2, 2015 and notably asked for permission to appoint the new developer. In an interim decision of May 8, 2015, the court authorized the petitioner to launch and execute the tender, but not to appoint a new developer.24 In response, counsel for the petitioner stated that the Greater Bombay Municipal Corporation had already rejected the respondent`s application for an IOD filed in March 2011. The respondent received a much later IOD that did not comply with the provisions of the development agreement. The respondent had assured the petitioner to provide a guarantee to the bank and to incriminate TDR before the members of the petitioner evacuated the premises. However, the members of the petitioner were willing and willing to evacuate their respective premises, as the respondent had not fulfilled his various obligations, so that the phase of the petitioner`s members who were evacuating their premises had not been created. Although the petitioner accepted several concessions requested by the respondent, such as the limited TDR loading. B, the respondent cannot even charge the limited TDR. 4) You can terminate the development contract if the owner has not done any work for 15 years for 2 years.
The petitioner`s qualified lawyer states that the interviewee was faced with financial problems and took significant steps under the above development agreement, which resulted in considerable difficulties for members of the petitioning society. The respondent repeatedly asked the petitioner to grant leave to amend several amendments proposed by the respondent and to extend the time to comply with the respondent`s obligations. Although the petitioner granted such leniency, the respondent has not yet made progress. The unregant contract is not upheld in court. 2. Is there a clause in the agreement that sets the time frame within which the developer is automatically considered that the development, which is not complete and has not been completed, is automatically considered complete? … of all parties.  Ld Advocate Shri. Wavikar argues that the termination of the development agreement by Opponent No. 6 with Opponent No.
1 does not exonerate the opponent… and the 7th opponent No. 6 has no Nexus with opponent Number 7. The development agreement with Opponent No. 1 was terminated and the public document in this sense that notified the termination was [Group 8 Case Vaidehi Akash Soc] publ… /2012 and 296/2012 Opponent`s Letter of Award No. 1.) Opponent number 1 takes number 1 as a developer due to the termination of its development contract. Subsequently, the opponent in question No. 1 entered…
…. Is the termination of the development contract of 27.03.2007 invalid and illegal? D. Is the immediate withdrawal of Mr. Sanjeev J. Aeren from the Board of Directors illegal … between the parties with regard to the Memorandum of Understanding of 28.12.2006, the Complementary Protocol of 27.03.2007 and the development agreement of 27.03.2007, concluded between… Petent No.