As per case facts, a developer (applicant) and property owners (respondents 1-10) entered a JDA for a residential project. Applicant received Power of Attorney and advance. Planning approval was denied ... due to unmet road widening. Respondents 1-10 cancelled the JDA/POA, citing applicant's non-compliance, and engaged another developer (respondent 11). Applicant sought interim injunctions from the High Court, which respondents moved to vacate. The question arose whether the interim injunctions should continue, considering prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss. Finally, the High Court ruled applicant failed road widening conditions. It favored owners, deeming their potential loss irreparable versus applicant's compensable loss. Interim injunctions were vacated, an arbitrator appointed, and future property dealings made subject to arbitration's final award.