Patna High CourtCWJC/5975/2016withdrawn

Ravi Shekhar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-12-19Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5975 of 2016 =========================================================== Ravi Shekhar, Son of Chandra Shekhar Singh, Resident of Mohalla Gayatri Nagar, P.S.- Motihari Town, District- East- Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Inspector General of Registration at Patna.

2. The District Magistrate-cum-District Registrar, East Champaran.

3. The Sub-Registrar, Motihari no. 2 and 3 of Motihari no.2 and 3 of Motihari Town P.S. P.O. Motihari and District East Champaran.

4. Motilal Manjhi, Son of Nathuni Manjhi, Resident of Village- Bara Bariarpur, P.S- Chhatauni, Motihari, District- East Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar and Mr. Umakant Shukla, Advocates For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Uday Shankar Sharan Singh, G.P. 19 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following relief:

"1. That through this application, the petitioner prays for the issuance of an appropriate writ/direction commanding the respondent no. 2 and 3 to complete the registration of the sale deed dated 16.04.2015 duly executed by the respondent no. 4 which was presented before the respondent no. 3 on 16.04.2015 under taken no. 4306/serial no. 4249 and the execution was admitted by the respondent no. 4 on the same day, and to deliver the said sale deed to the petitioner."

3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.5975 of 2016 dt.19-12-2017 2/2 application to file a duly constituted civil suit before the Court of competent jurisdiction for declaration of his/her right and title over the land in question. Learned counsel submitted that since huge amount of Court fee, stamp and registration fee have been paid, the Court would protect him to the extent that the same may not be destroyed and should rather be preserved to abide by the ultimate decision of the Court.

4. Learned counsel for the State does not object.

5. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off as withdrawn with a direction that the documents as well as the registration fee paid by the petitioner shall be preserved, which would ultimately abide by the result of adjudication by the Court of competent jurisdiction.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U