JUDGMENT Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - The petitioner-decree-holder is aggrieved of order dated 05.10.2013 passed in Execution Case No.08 of 2012/159 of 2012 by which he has been directed to furnish bank-guarantee, as a condition for withdrawal of the decreetal amount. 2. Referring to the supplementary counter-affidavit dated 12.10.2018, Sri Vikash Kishore Prasad, the learned State counsel states that since the judgment and decree in Money Suit No.11 of 1997 has not been challenged by the defendant-State, the petitioner is entitled for payment of the decreetal amount and the deposit, if any, in excess to the decreetal amount should be permitted to be withdrawn by the State. 3. It is not in dispute that Money Suit No.11 of 1997 has been decreed and a decree for Rs.535962/- with interest @ 6% per annum for 3 years has been prepared. The decree-holder, thus, is entitled for payment of the aforesaid amount, however, the learned State counsel has submitted that Rs.897540/- has been mistakenly deposited for satisfaction of the aforesaid decree and, therefore, the excess amount should be permitted to be withdrawn by the State. 4. In the above facts, the impugned order dated 05.10.2013 is set-aside. The petitioner shall be permitted to withdraw the decreetal amount as indicated hereinabove and the excess amount deposited by the judgment-debtor- State shall be released to the State of Jharkhand. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of.