Judgment :- The above contempt petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to punish the respondent for wilfully disobeying the order of this Court, dated 9. 2003, made in W.P.No.25316 of 2003. 2. The petitioner had filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.25316 of 2003, praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to demolish the walls comprised in S.No.213/2 on the eastern side of the petitioners plot No.107 in pursuance of the notice issued by the first respondent, dated 8. 2003. 3. The order of this Court, dated 9. 2003, reads as follows: "Petitioner filed the above writ petition for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to demolish the walls comprised in S.No.213/2 on the eastern side of the petitioners plot No.107 in pursuance of the notice issued by the first respondent dated 8. 2003. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though notice was issued on 8. 2003, the respondents are not taking effective steps to enforce the said notice. 3. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, if respondents 1 and 2 are not prevented by any order of Court to implement the said notice, they are directed to implement the notice dated 8. 2003 after giving opportunity to the fourth respondent and complete the same within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 4. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. The connected W.P.M.P. is closed." 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that in spite of the directions issued by this Court, by its order, dated 9. 2003, the respondent had not complied with the same. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent stating that in pursuance of the order of this Court, dated 9. 2003 made in W.P.No.25316 of 2003, a reply had been sent vide letter Na.Ka.No.11088/03/F2; dated 112. 2003. 6. It is further stated that the fourth respondent in the writ petition, namely, Arun Agarwal had filed a civil suit in O.S.No.383 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ambattur and an interim order of status quo had been granted by the said Court by its order, dated 111. 2003 in I.A.No.1822 of 2003 in O.S.No.383 of 2003. 7. 2003 in I.A.No.1822 of 2003 in O.S.No.383 of 2003. 7. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent had not committed contempt of Court as alleged by the petitioner. Hence, the contempt petition stands closed. Consequently, connected sub Application No.378 of 2007 is closed. No costs.