SANTOSH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and also the learned counsel for respondent No.3.

(2.) The controversy arises out of the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the amount deposited by the respondent - beneficiary pursuant to an interim order by the appellate court does not amount to 25% as directed by the Appellate court. In the interregnum, the Division Bench of this court has heard the appeal and matter is reserved for pronouncement of judgment.

(3.) In that view of the matter, this court is of the opinion that the instant controversy has been rendered infructuous and the petitions will not survive for consideration.