THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Contempt Case No.738 of 2011 ORDER: The respondent herein filed W.P.No.6360 of 2011, feeling aggrieved by the steps initiated by the petitioner for evicting him. This Court passed a detailed order on 23.03.2011 in W.P.M.P.No.8742 of 2011 indicating the course of action. That was followed by another order, dated 30.03.2011. The gist thereof is that it shall be open to the respondent herein to participate in the auction and if he does not emerge as successful bidder, he shall be under obligation to vacate the premises. This Contempt Case is filed alleging that the respondent has violated the directions issued by this Court in the orders, referred to above. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri B.Chandrasen Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent, submits that his client vacated the premises long back and he has no subsisting interest in it. The grievance of the petitioner is only about the alleged failure on the part of the respondent to vacate the premises. Across the bar, it is stated that the respondent has vacated the premises. It is open to the petitioner to resume possession of the premises, not withstanding any claim made by the respondent, or anybody claiming through him. The Contempt Case is accordingly closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:17.08.2011 GJ