Judgment Jayant Patel, J.—The present appeal is directed against the order dated 12.4.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No.2652 of 2012, whereby the learned Single Judge has granted interim relief on certain conditions. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. Tanna, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Mr. Dipak Dave, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. Rathod, learned Counsel for the respondent, state that subsequently as the conditions were not complied with, the application was made by the respondents for vacating the interim relief by preferring Civil Application No.7541 of 2012 in Special Civil Application No.2652 of 2012 and the learned Single Judge, vide order dated 22.8.2012, has vacated the interim relief. 3. As such, in view of the aforesaid subsequent circumstances, appeal can be said as become infructuous, since ad-interim order, which is impugned in the present appeal, has been vacated. 4. However, Mr. Tanna, learned Sr. Counsel for the appellant apprehends that in view of the operation of the condition for some time, it may not be contended against the appellant that such condition was not complied with. 5. However, the learned Counsel for both the sides conceded to the position that the main Special Civil Application is yet to be finally heard by the learned Single Judge. 6. In our view, when the interim order, which is impugned in the present petition dated 12.4.2012, is subsequently vacated by the learned Single Judge, the question of compliance of the conditions would not arise and, therefore, the apprehension is not well-founded. 7. Under these circumstances, the present appeal is disposed of as having become infructuous in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances.