JUDGMENT :

P.Naveen Rao, J.

1. Facts as culled out from the pleadings are as under:

1.1. On 19.10.2002 Development Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney (DAGPA) was entered into by the respondents 1 to 6 in favour of appellant for development of land admeasuring 3.5-3.6 acres (2 acres from respondents 1 to 4’s total land of Acs.3.00 and 1.5-1.6 acres from respondents 5 and 6’s total land of Acs.2.00) situated in Sy.N.136 of Gachibowli village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy district to be developed into a residential layout with independent houses. On 29.10.2002 appellant paid an amount of Rs. 12,50,000/- to respondents 1 to 4 and Rs.9,00,000/- to respondents 5 and 6 as refundable deposit. The amount with respect to respondents 5 and 6 was paid in favour of Patel Engineering Limited as respondents 5 and 6 were Directors of the said company. The DAGPA required owners of the land to ensure mutation of their names in revenue records. On 24.07.2004, Mutation Certificate was obtained in favour of the original pattedar, Syed Suleman, vide proceedings bearing No.B/1986/1997.

1.2. Later, respondents 1 to 6 expressed desire to develop a Star hotel on the land instead of residential layout. Further, they requested the appellant to restrict the area to be developed from 3.5-3.6 acres to 9009 square yards and to construct a high-rise building as opposed to residential apartments. The appellant agreed to restrict the development area to 9009 square yards.

1.3. On 06.02.2007, Authorization Letter was issued by the Airport Authorities of India for the construction of a high-rise building. On 10.09.2007, the Fire and Emergency Services Department granted permission for the construction of a high-rise building.

1.4. On 30.10.2007, DAGPA was entered into by respondents 1 to 6 in favour of the appellant for development of land admeasuring 9009 square yards (5349 square yard from respondents 1 to 4 and 3659 square yards from respondents 5 and 6) situated at Sy.No.136 of Gachibowli village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy district to be developed into a high-rise office/software block (commercial building). The DAGPA terms specify that it should be registered within three months or after mutation of names of the present landowners in the revenue records as pattedars is completed, whichever is later. It was mutually agreed to share the constructed area, undivided share of land and parking area in the ratio of 60 to claimant and 40 to respondents 1 to 6. It was agreed that construction will be completed within 36 months after obtaining building permission. It was also agreed that if the GHMC/HUDA insist on uniform setback of 13 Mtrs all around the building, the total extent of land for development would be 9174 square yards.

1.5. On 24.05.2010, respondents 1 to 6 obtained NOC from the Office of the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. On 18.10.2010, appellant obtained the Land Use Information Certificate issued by the Commissioner, GHMC. On 02.11.2010, respondents 1 to 6 furnished the Revenue Sketch Plan of land admeasuring Acs.5.00 in Sy.No.136/2.

1.6. Land Use Certificate issued by the HMDA reflected that the land admeasuring Acs.5.00 was falling in commercial are (Commercial-cum-Offices) and was partly affected under 60 Mtrs road at one side and partly affected under 36 Mtrs wide road on the other side. The appellant claims to have taken various steps to secure construction permission. In the process, appellant came to know that road width was increased to 150 Mtrs from earlier 60 Mtrs and this has affected larger area of respondents 5 and 6. This required revision of proposals.

1.7. On 15.05.2015, appellant came to know that respondent no.5 alienated 4840 square yards of land to Sreshta Constructions i.e., a group company of respondent no.9 (Sreshta Properties) along with the western boundary of the scheduled property which was given for development to the appellant.

1.8. Appellant filed Arbitration O.P.No.1077 of 2015 seeking an injunctio