https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286938 A developer's suit for specific performance of a development agreement was held not maintainable because the statutory conditions for enforcement under the Specific Relief Act were not satisfied, including the absence of the possession-based requirement relied on by the court. The court also held that a power-of-attorney executed to facilitate development was not coupled with an interest in the immovable property, so it remained revocable and could not by itself support ad interim injunction. As the substantive claim was barred, no prima facie case was established and the injunction refusal was upheld. en-us Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Mar 2020 11:50:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286938 A developer's suit for specific performance of a development agreement was held not maintainable because the statutory conditions for enforcement under the Specific Relief Act were not satisfied, including the absence of the possession-based requirement relied on by the court. The court also held that a power-of-attorney executed to facilitate development was not coupled with an interest in the immovable property, so it remained revocable and could not by itself support ad interim injunction. As the substantive claim was barred, no prima facie case was established and the injunction refusal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286938