IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2009 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 33940 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.227/2004 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: --------------- K.CHANDRAN, S/O.KUMARA VELU, DEVI SADANAM, NELLIVILA P.O., VAVAMOOLA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.D.KISHORE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ATHIYANNOOR BLOCK PANCHAYATH, ATHIYANNOOR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ATHIYANNOOR BLOCK PANCHAYATH, ATHIYANNOOR, ARALUMMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN, GOVT.PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.33940 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the decree holder in O.S.No.227 of 2004 on the file of the 1st Additional sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The decree debt due was deposited by the State/judgment debtor. However, when a cheque application was moved by the petitioner/decree holder it was objected to by the judgment debtor submitting that an appeal had been preferred against the decree. Learned Sub Judge thereupon passed Ext.P5 order directing the decree holder to furnish security for release of the amount deposited. Propriety and correctness of Ext.P5 order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Learned Government pleader has taken notice for the respondents. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. W.P.(C).No.33940 of 2009 - O 2 3. Learned Government Pleader after collecting instructions has reported that no appeal is pending against the decree which is now being executed by the petitioner/decree holder. It is submitted, a review petition filed by the decree holder for reviewing Ext.P5 order is pending. Whatever that be, if no appeal is pending, the cheque application moved by the petitioner/decree holder has to be considered and appropriate orders to be passed in accordance with law. Court below is directed to pass appropriate orders taking note that no appeal is pending against the decree executed. Writ petition is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-