As per case facts, a landowner, through various agreements with developers, planned phased development of a large property. Units in one building were sold via MOFA Agreements, and the building ... was completed. A Cooperative Society was formed but conveyance of title was delayed for decades, leading the Society to seek unilateral deemed conveyance from the Competent Authority. The Authority granted conveyance for a proportionate land area. The Petitioners challenged this Order, arguing that prior agreements only contemplated leasehold rights, not freehold conveyance, that there were procedural irregularities in notice and application, and that conveyance was premature until the entire layout was complete. The question arose whether the Competent Authority's Order granting freehold deemed conveyance was valid given the contractual stipulations and alleged procedural flaws. Finally, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petitions, upholding the Competent Authority's Order. The Court ruled that MOFA Agreements for Sale, which explicitly provided for title transfer and land consideration, take precedence over earlier internal arrangements contemplating leasehold rights. It emphasized that MOFA mandates the promoter to convey full right, title, and interest. Procedural defects were deemed non-prejudicial, and complex title disputes were left for civil adjudication. The conveyance was not premature given the long delay in overall development.