IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2010 / 24TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12835 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OS.581/2005 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRIKKAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- MANI SENAN, AGED 59 YEARS, W/O.LATE E.K.CHANDRASENAN, HOUSE NO.42/2814, MONIMANDIRAM, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682 035. ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA SMT.M.K.ASWATHI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.12835 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of June, 2010. JUDGMENT This Writ Petition is in challenge of the order passed by executing court allowing application for cheque preferred by respondent. Respondent obtained an exparte decree for recovery of damages from petitioner for allegedly trespassing into his property and constructing a road. Petitioner filed Ext.P1, I.A.No.4500 of 2008 on 11.07.2008 to set aside the exparte decree. In the meantime respondent launched execution of the decree and certain amount standing to the credit of petitioner was attached and it is pursuant to that, respondent filed application for cheque which was allowed. That order is under challenge in this Writ Petition. It is conceded by both sides that Ext.P1, application to set aside the exparte decree was allowed on 02.06.2010 which means that there is no decree now in favour of respondent. As such, the order allowing respondent to withdraw the amount can have no force. This Writ Petition has become infructuous. Resultantly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks