IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3270 of 2006 PARSHURAM SHARMA, SON OF LATE NUNU SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURAN, P.S. KARPI, DISTRICT ARWAL. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-COLLECTOR-CUM DISTRICT REGISTRAR, ARWAL. 3. SUB-REGISTRAR, ARWAL. 4. JANESHWAR SHARMA SON OF KAMAL SHARMA, RESDIENT OF VILLAGE KHARSANATH, P.S. MEHANDIA DISTRICT ARWAL, AT PRESENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURAN P.S. KARPI, DISTRICT ARWAL. ----------- 03. 22.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the counsel for respondent no.4, the executant of the sale deed dated 25.10.1991, Annexure-1. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that having executed the sale deed dated 25.10.1991 respondent no.4 did not appear before the Sub-Registrar, Arwal to admit its execution before the Sub-Registrar. On failure of respondent no.4 to admit the registration, Case No.02 of 1992 was initiated for compulsory registration of the sale deed, Annexure-1. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in spite of service of notice for appearance in Case No.02 of 1992, respondent no.4 did not choose to appear in the said proceeding. Such fact would appear from the order passed by the Sub-Registrar dated 19.5.1992. Petitioner challenged the order dated 19.5.1992 by filing Case No.10/D.M./1992-93 Jehanabad 7/D.M., Arwal which was also dismissed under orders dated 14/16.11.2005, Annexure-2. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that respondent - 2 - no.4 is required to appear before the Sub-Registrar, Arwal and to state before him about receipt/non-receipt of the amount of Rs.17,000/-, the part consideration which was to be paid to him at the time of exchange of equivalent and to admit the execution of the sale deed. 4. It is quite evident from the order dated 19.5.1992 passed by the Sub-Registrar, Arwal and the District Magistrate, Arwal dated 14/16.11.2005, Annexure-2 that respondent no.4 has not appeared before the authorities to deny the receipt of the part consideration money, which was to be paid to him at the time of exchange of the equivalent. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties, I set aside the order dated 19.5.1992 passed by the Sub-Registrar, Arwal and the order dated 14/16.11.2005 passed by the District Magistrate, Arwal with direction to the parties to appear before the Sub-Registrar, Arwal on 15.4.2011 and state before him whether respondent no.4 received the part consideration money amounting to Rs.17,000/- on the date of presentation of the said sale deed. 6. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)