The answer is: A
Explanation
The most accurate application of the principle set out below is:
A: B is protected by the doctrine of part performance and cannot be asked to reverse the modifications and vacate the property.
Explanation :
The principle mentioned states that the transferee should, in part performance of the contract, have taken possession of the property, or any part thereof, or if already in possession, should have continued to be in possession in part performance of the contract, and should have done some act in furtherance of the contract.
In this scenario, B has taken possession of the property and has undertaken modifications, which can be seen as an act in furtherance of the contract between A and B.
The doctrine of part performance is a legal principle that protects the rights of a transferee who has taken possession of the property and performed acts in furtherance of the contract, even if the contract is not registered.
Therefore, A cannot simply ask B to reverse the modifications and vacate the property if B has met the conditions of part performance.
Options B, C, and E incorrectly focus on the registration of the contract, which is not the key issue here. Option D also doesn't consider the doctrine of part performance. Option A correctly applies the principle by protecting B's rights based on part performance.