Soon the Nizams found themselves under pressure from Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (Ittehad), the Muslim nationalist party that was active in the state and withdrew from the agreement.  On the morning of 27 October, Qasim Rizvi, the leader of Ittehad, organized a massive demonstration by several thousand activists to block the delegation`s withdrawal. He convinced Nizam that, as India was then linked to the defence of Kashmir, it did not exceed sufficient resources to put pressure on Hyderabad. He claimed that a Hyderabad princess could get a much more favorable deal.  Nizam then appointed a new delegation, dominated by members of the Executive Council opposed to the previous agreement.  Former Hyderabad bureaucrat Mohammed Hyder called the event the “October coup.” From that moment on, Qasim Rizvi began calling the gunfire in the Hyderabad administration.  The State of Jammu and Kashmir, bordering India and Pakistan, has decided to remain independent. She offered to sign status quo agreements with both gentlemen. Pakistan immediately agreed, but India called for further talks. In November 1947, Hyderabad signed a status quo agreement with Indian rule and pursued all previous agreements, with the exception of the deployment of Indian troops to the state. In September 1948, after a year of negotiations and an economic blockade against the state, India invaded India and annexed hyderabad.  Nizam then signed an accession instrument to which India adhered.  The status quo agreement was separated from the accession instrument formulated at about the same time by the Department of States, which was a legal document including a transfer of sovereignty to the extent specified in the instrument.
 On 29 November 1947, the Indian government signed a status quo agreement with the Nizam of Hyderabad, which decided to give both parties one year to reach an amicable solution. Nizam privately hoped that he could continue as an independent sovereign. Plan B is expected to make Hyderabad part of Pakistan. AND CONSIDERING that it is advantageous for both parties that existing agreements and administrative arrangements on matters of common interest be pursued until such a final agreement: Hyderabad violated all the terms of the agreement: in foreign affairs, by carrying out intrigues with Pakistan, to which it secretly lent 15 million pounds; in defence, by building a large semi-military army; communication, through interventions in border traffic and transit traffic of Indian railways.  India has also been accused of violating the agreement by imposing an economic blockade. It turns out that the State of Bombay unknowingly intervened from Delhi in deliveries to Hyderabad. The government has promised to take it with the provincial governments, but scholar Lucien Benichou says it has never been done. India also delayed India`s arms deliveries to Hyderabad, which was later de affirmed as a violation of the status quo agreement.
 According to K.M Munshi, appointed India`s general agent in Hyderabad, the Indians felt that the conclusion of a status quo agreement with Hyderabad meant that India had lost control of Hyderabad`s affairs. The Hyderabad State Congress opposed it because it was seen by the Indian government as a sign of weakness.  V. P. Menon stated that Nizam and his advisers viewed the agreement as a respite from which Indian troops would be withdrawn and the state could establish its position to maintain its independence.  Article 4. All disputes arising from this agreement or agreements or agreements are referred to arbitration by two arbitrators, one of whom is appointed by each of the parties, and an arbitrator appointed by those arbitrators.