REETA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jasbir Singh Arora, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned AC to GP-26, for the Respondent-State and Mr. Shyam Sundar Prasad, learned counsel for Respondent no.4.

(2.) The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 27/6/2014, passed in Registration Case No. 05 of 2014-15, by Respondent no.2, the Collector- cum-District Magistrate, Patna, as contained in Annexure-3, whereby the application preferred against the order dtd. 22/5/2014, passed in Registration Case No. 03 of 2014 by Respondent no.3, the District Sub-Registrar, Patna, has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for a direction to the Respondent authorities to direct the Respondent no.4 to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner with regard to the properties in question. The relief prayed for in paragraph 1 of the writ application reads as follows:

(3.) The factual matrix of the case as per the petitioner is that private Respondent no.4 agreed to sell a piece of land appertaining to Revenue Thana No. 100, Tauzi No. 5818, Khata No. 144, Survey Plot No. 48 (part), measuring an area of 2 Kattha 6 Dhur, situated in Mauza Belwara, Survey Thana Phulwarisharif, recent Thana Gopalpur, District Patna, in favour of the Petitioner. The Respondent no.4, after receiving entire consideration amount of Rs.17,25,000.00, agreed to appear before the Sub-Registrar and to execute the sale deed with regard to the land in question by putting his signature. The petitioner presented the sale deed before the Sub-Registrar on 26/11/2013, but the Respondent no.4, with ulterior motive, did not appear. Accordingly, the petitioner filed petition under Sec. 36 of the Indian Registration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before Respondent no.3, the Sub-Registrar, Patna, but despite issuance of summons to the Respondent No. 4, vide Memo No. 11663 dtd. 27/11/2013, Memo No. 12210 dtd. 10/12/2013, Memo No. 899 dtd. 22/1/2014, Memo No. 2220 dtd. 22/2/2014 and Memo No. 3063 dtd. 13/3/2014, to appear before the District Sub-Registrar, Patna on any working day till 25/3/2014 either for accepting or denying the execution of sale deed presented before the Respondent no. 3, the Respondent No. 4 did not appear. But the summons, bearing Memo No. 3063 dtd. 13/3/2014 was returned to the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Patna with a report that Respondent No. 4 is not staying on the address given. Consequently, Respondent no.3, the Sub-Registrar, Patna, vide order dtd. 25/3/2014, passed in Registration Case No. 03 of 2014, as contained in Annexure-1, declined to register the sale deed, under Sec. 34 of the Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter called the Act) due to non-appearance of Respondent No. 4.