1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL MISC. CONTEMPT PETITION NO.136/2008 IN S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION NO.80/2007 (Charan Dayal Mathur Vs. Smt. Marudhar Bhati & Anr.) Date of order :: 08.12.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.R.K. Thanvi, for the petitioner. Mr.J.K. Bhaiya, for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents are liable to be taken to the task for committing contempt of order passed by this Court on 29th January, 2008 passed upon an application filed by the respondents in S.B. Civil Writ Petition NO.4713/2007. Further it is argued that in view of the order dated 29th January, 2008 respondents was to deliver the vacant possession of the suit premises to the petitioner by or before 25th February, 2008 and shall also be liable to pay all arrears of rent but the said order was not complied with by the respondent-contemnor. It is also pointed 2 out by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court has observed that in case of non-compliance of this order, the respondent- plaintiff may move an application before this Court for punishing the petitioner for committing contempt of this Court as oral undertaking has been accepted by this Court to give benefit taking a very lenient view and the respondent shall also be entitled to execute the decree forthwith. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents that the said order was passed in the writ petition filed against the interlocutory order by the respondents. Thereafter, the petition for eviction was finally decided by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. Thereafter, a writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4354/2008 was preferred by the petitioner, which has been dismissed by a detailed order. Against that order, a special appeal was preferred by the respondents before the Division Bench that too was dismissed and it was ordered that respondent will file undertaking before the Rent Tribunal to handover the vacant possession of the premises before 31st May, 2009. It is also ordered by the Division Bench that the said undertaking shall be furnished by the respondents within a period of 15 days from the date of order passed by the Division Bench. 3 In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the respondents submits that now non-petitioner is to vacate the premises on 31st May, 2009 and for that purpose he will furnish undertaking before the trial court as ordered by the Division Bench. In my opinion, no purpose will be served to proceed further. Hence, the contempt petition is dismissed. Notices of contempt are hereby discharged. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. A.K. Chouhan/- A.K. Chouhan/-