PER JUSTICE R.C.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 10.12.2003 passed by Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Ahmedabad ( in short, he State Commission in complaint no. 161/99. By the impugned order, the State Commission has allowed the complaint filed by the complainant Jain Tirth Raksha Trust through its Ttrustees and has directed the opposite party-Cement Corporation of India ( CCI) to pay to the complainant-trust a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- with interest @ 15% p.a. from 01.08.96 till payment, besides cost of Rs.15000/- towards the proceedings. The State Commission, has, however, declined to grant any compensation apart from the said relief. 2. We have heard Mr.Rohit Bhat, Advocate, learned counsel representing the appellant but had not the advantage of hearing the say of the respondent as respondent remained unrepresented on record despite service of notice on th appeal. 3. Besides assailing the order on merits, learned counsel has informed the Commission that the order passed by the State Commission stands realized inasmuch as after the passing of the order and pursuant to the order dated 21.03.2006 made by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, the appellant company has already paid a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- to the complainant trust by a cheque no.915789 dated 31.03.2006 was pursuant to one time settlement. The terms, subject to which the said payment was made are evident from the forwarding letter dated 31.03.2006 which is to the following effect: ef.C/BIFR/OTS-06/39 March 31,2006 Jain Tirath Raxa Trust J.P.Sanskruti Bhawan 2777 Nisha Pole, Zaveriwad Relief Road Ahmedabad Sub: Settlement of outstanding dues in full and final settlement on OTS basis. Dear Sir, As per the Rehabilitation Scheme sanctioned by Honle Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction ( BIFR) in its hearing held on 21.03.2006, please find enclosed a cheque no. 915789 dated 31.03.2006 for Rs.450000.00 ( Rs.Four lacs fifty thousand only) drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad towards full and final settlement of your outstanding dues on One Time Settlement ( OTS) basis. In case, however, the above is not acceptable to you, the enclosed cheque may not be encashed by you and the same may please be returned to us. Kindly acknowledge receipt on the duplicate copy of this instant communication. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that said cheque has been encashed by the respondent Trust and, therefore, order of the State Commission stands realized and so he does not press the legal question in regard to the liability of appellant to pay the amount as a sick unit on the strength of Section 22 of the SICA Act. In view of the above noted position, this appeal does not survive and is disposed of as such leaving the parties to bear their own costs. It is also not necessary for us to go into the grounds taken up by the appellant in appeal in order to assail the impugned order. The legal question raised in the appeal is left to be answered in some other better case.