Conditional allotment and transferee rights: assignee cannot claim better title, and resumption for non-compliance was upheld.

A transferee pendente lite cannot challenge a resumption order by relying on the transfer alone, because an assignee acquires no better right than the original allottee and cannot enforce the benefit of the allotment without accepting its accompanying obligations. A clause requiring construction and commencement of the industrial unit within the stipulated time, with resumption on default, was treated as a valid conditional term binding on the allottee. As the project was not implemented within time, the resumption was upheld and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the transferee pendente lite could rely on the transfer to challenge the resumption order. (ii) Whether the allotment clause requiring construction and commencement of industry within the stipulated time, failing which the plot could be resumed, was valid and binding.

Issue (i): Whether the transferee pendente lite could rely on the transfer to challenge the resumption order.

Analysis: The transfer during pendency did not by itself bar the purchase, but the decisive question was whether the assignee acquired any enforceable right against the Corporation. The assignee could claim no better right than the allottee, because the contract of allotment was made on the allottee's personal undertaking to fulfil the stipulated obligations. An assignee of contractual rights cannot enforce the benefit of the arrangement without accepting the corresponding obligations, and in the absence of the Corporation's consent the inductee could not compel recognition as allottee.

Conclusion: The transferee had no locus standi to challenge the resumption order and the contention failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the allotment clause requiring construction and commencement of industry within the stipulated time, failing which the plot could be resumed, was valid and binding.

Analysis: The conveyance did not create an absolute interest free from the conditions attached to the allotment. A condition attached to the transfer that the industrial unit must be set up within the stipulated period, failing which the interest would cease and the plot could be resumed, was treated as a valid condition consistent with the law governing conditional transfers. The allottee's own reply showed that the project had not been implemented within the required time, and the Corporation was therefore entitled to act under the agreement.

Conclusion: The resumption clause was valid and binding, and the resumption of the plot was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the resumption failed on both validity and standing, and the dismissal of the special leave petition followed.

Ratio Decidendi: A transferee of contractual or proprietary rights subject to an allotment agreement cannot enforce the transferor's rights against the grantor without accepting the accompanying obligations, and a conditional transfer may validly provide for cessation of the interest on failure to satisfy the stipulated condition.

---