5. It is the petitioner`s responsibility that the IOC did not receive the respondent until 28 March 2013, twenty-six months after the conclusion of the development contract and 10 months after the approval of the revised plans by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the IOC in question was defective, as it only covered housing for 56 members and not for 97 members. The IOC in question was on behalf of Kumar Urban Development and not on behalf of the company. 26. Suppliers agree and confirm that Developers have the right to transfer all or part of the benefit and burden of this Agreement to one or more parties, subject to the terms set forth in this Agreement, and that Sellers do not object and that the terms of this Agreement remain binding on such buyers. The above payment gives the sellers default interest until payment of the agreed rate of .. % per year. as stated above, on the balance of the purchase price in full and final payment of the Seller`s claim on said land after the conclusion of the sale and / or execution of the deed of transfer and whether more than one instrument of transmission is to be executed during the execution of the last transfer and all other necessary writings in favor of the developers, their nominees, including a housing cooperative company or a proposed entity, as indicated below. The petitioner asked the respondent to immediately stop advertising the petitioner`s rehabilitation project via its website. The petitioner then filed this petition on February 2, 2015 and requested, among other things, permission to appoint the new developer.
By an interim order of May 8, 2015, this court allowed the plaintiff to launch and execute the processing of the offer, but not to appoint any new developers It is advisable to discuss in detail the draft development agreement at the General Assembly in order to reach a consensus on its conditions in order to avoid subsequent problems. . . .