Name of the journal

COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN

CONE BANACH SPACE BY USING
OCCASIONALLY WEAK COMPATIBLE MAPPINGS
Animesh Gupta
Department of Mathemathics
Truba Institute of Engineering and Information Technology
Bhopal, INDIA
E- mail: animeshgupta10@gmail.com

Ramakant Bhardwaj
Department of Mathemathics
Truba Institute of Engineering and Information Technology
Bhopal, INDIA
E- mail: rkbhardwaj100@gmail.com

Abstract
In this article, we prove a common fixed point theorem in cone Ba-
nach space satisfying occasionally weak compatible mapping by using
rational contraction. Recently E. Karapinar (Fixed Point Theorems
in Cone Banach Spaces, Fixed Point Theory Applications, Article ID
609281, 9 pages, 2009) present some fixed point theorems for self map-
pings satisfying certain contraction principles on Cone Banach Spaces.
Here we will give some generalization of this theorem. Also our result
is extension and generalization of result of Das and Gupta [9] in cone
Banach space.

Mathematics Subject Classification: 47H10, 54H25.

Keywords: Cone Metric Space, Cone Banach Space, Weak Compatible

Mapping, Occasionally Weak Compatible Mapping.

1 Introduction and Preliminary

It is quite natural to consider generalization of the notion of metric d : X×X →
[0, ∞). The question was, what must [0, ∞) be raplace by? In 1980 Bogdan
Rzepecki [1] in 1987 Shy- Der Lin [2] and in 2007 Huang and Zhang [3] gave
2 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

the same answer; Replace the real numbers with a Banach ordered by a cone,
resulting in the so called cone metric. In this setting, Bogdan Rzepecki [1]
introduced the generalized metric dE on a set X in a way that dE : X × X → S
where E is Banach space and S is a normal cone in E with partial order ≤. In
that paper the author generalized the fixed point theorems of Maia type [4]
which state is follows.

Let X be a nonempty set endowed in two metric d1 , d2 and T a mapping

of X into itself. Suppose that d1 (x, y) ≤ d2 (x, y) for all x, y ∈ X, and X is
complete space with respect to d1 , T is continuous with respect to d1 , and T is
contraction with respect to d2 , that is, d2 (T x, T y) ≤ kd2 (x, y) for all x, y ∈ X,
where 0 ≤ k < 1. Then T has a unique fixed point in X.

In 1987 Shy- Der Lin [2] considered the notion of K-metric spaces by replac-
ing real numbers with cone K in the metric function, that is, d : X × X → K.
Some results of Khan and Imdad [5] were considered for K- metric spaces.
Huang and Zhang [3] announced the notion of cone metric space shortly as
CMS by replacing real numbers with an ordering Banach Space. Also they
discussed some properties of convergence of sequence and proved a following
fixed point theorem of contractive mapping for cone metric spaces,

Any mapping T of a complete cone metric space X into itself that satisfies,
for some 0 ≤ k < 1, the inequality d(T x, T y) ≤ kd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X, has
a unique fixed point.

E. Karapinar [9] presented some fixed point theorems for self mappings
satisfying some contraction principles on a cone Banach space. More precisely,
he proved that for a closed and convex subset C of a cone Banach space with
the norm k . kP and letting conditions 0 ≤ s + |a| − 2b < 2(a + b) and
ad(T x, T y) + b[d(x, T x) + d(y, T y)] ≤ sd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ C, then T has at
least one fixed point.

In the same way T. Abdeljawad et.al. [7] generalized the result of E.

Karapinar [6], for a closed and convex subset C of a cone Banach space
with the norm k x kP and letting conditions 0 ≤ s+a−2bc 2(a+b)
< 1, a + b 6=
0, a+b+c > 0 and s ≥ 0 and T : C → C satisfying the condi-
tions ad(T x, T y) + b[d(x, T x) + d(y, T y)] + c(y, T x) ≤ sd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ C,
then T has at least one fixed point.

Besides this, in 1977 the first result of rational contraction type mapping
in metric space was introduced by Jaggi [8] on taking the following condition,
COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN CONE BANACH .... 3

d(x, T x)d(y, T y)
d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(x, y) (1)
d(x, y)
For all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1.

The above results (1) is not valid for x = y. This problem was removed by
Das and Gupta [17] that is (1) in 1975, B.K. Das and S. Gupta [9] proved the
following result.

d(y, T y)(1 + d(x, T x))

d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(x, y) (2)
1 + d(x, y)
For all x, y ∈ X and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1.

Here we will give some extension and generalization of above known re-
sults. Throughout this paper E = (E, k . k) stands for a real Banach space
and P = PE will always denote a closed non empty subset of E. Then P is
called a cone if ax + by ∈ P for all x, y ∈ P , and non negative real numbers
a,b where P ∩ (−P ) = {0} and P 6= {0}.
For a given P, one can defined a partial ordering (denoted by ≤ or ≤P ) with
respect to P by x ≤ y if and only if y − x ∈ P . The notation x < y indicates
that x ≤ y and x 6= y, while x  y will denote y − x ∈ intP , where intP is
denotes the interior of P. From now on, it is assumed that intP 6= φ.

The cone P is called normal if there is a number K ≥ 1 such that for all
x, y ∈ E : 0 ≤ x ≤ y ⇒k x k≤ K k y k. Here, the least positive integer
K satisfying the equation is called the normal constant of P. P is said to be
regular if every increasing sequence which is bounded from above is convergent.
That is, if {xn }n≥1 is a sequence such that x1 ≤ x2 ≤ x3 ≤ ...... ≤ y for some
y ∈ E, then there is x ∈ E such that limn→∞ k xn − x k= 0.

Lemma 1.1 (see [19], [20])

1. Every regular cone is normal.

2. For each k > 1, there is a normal constant K > k.

3. The cone P is regular if every decreasing sequence which is bounded from

below is convergent.

Proofs of (1) and (2) parts of above lemma are given in [11] and the last
one is follows from definition.

Definition 1.2 Let X be a non empty set. Suppose the mapping d : SX ×

X → E satisfies:
4 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

1. 0 ≤ d(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X,

2. d(x, y) = 0 if and only if x = y,

3. d(x, y) ≤ d(x, z) + d(z, y) for all x, y ∈ X,

4. d(x, y) = d(y, x) for all x, y ∈ X,

Then d is called a cone metric on X, and the pair is a cone metric space or
shortly as CMS.

Example 1.3 Let E = R3 , P = {(x, y, z) ∈ E : x, y, z ≥ 0}, and X = R.

Define d : X × X → E by d(x, y) = (α | x − y |, β | x − y |, γ | x − y |) where
α, β, γ are positive constants. Then (X, d) is a CMS. Note that the cone P is
normal with the normal constant K = 1.

It is quite natural consider cone normed spaces or shortly as CNS.

Definition 1.4 (see [12],[13]) Let X be a vector space over R. Suppose the
mapping k . kP : X → E satisfies :

1. k x kP ≥ 0 for all x ∈ X,

2. k x kP = 0 if and only if x = y ,

3. k x + y kP ≥k x kP + k y kP for all x, y ∈ X,

4. k kx kP = |k| k x kP = 0 for all k ∈ R,

Then k . kP is called a cone norm on X, and the pair (X, k . kP ) is cone normed
space. Note that each CNS is a CMS. Indeed , d(x, y) =k x − y kP .

Definition 1.5 Let (X, k . kP ) be a CNS, x ∈ X and {xn }n≥1 a sequence

is X. Then :

1. {xn }n≥1 converges to x whenever for every c ∈ E with 0 << c there is a

natural number N such that k xn − x kP << c for all n ≥ N . it is denoted
by limn→∞ xn = x or xn → x.

2. {xn }n≥1 Cauchy sequence converges to x whenever for every c ∈ E with

0  c there is a natural number N such that k xn − x kP  c for all
m, n ≥ N .

3. Let (X, k . kP ) is a complete CNS if every Cauchy sequence is convergent.

As expected, complete cone normed spaces will be called cone Banach spaces.
COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN CONE BANACH .... 5

Lemma 1.6 Let (X, k . kP ) be a CNS, P a normal cone with normal con-
stant K, and {xn }n≥1 a sequence in X. Then,

1. The sequence {xn }n≥1 converges to x , iff k xn − x kP → 0 as n → ∞.

2. The sequence {xn }n≥1 is Cauchy converges to x , iff k xn − xm kP → 0 as

n, m → ∞.

3. The sequence {xn }n≥1 converges to x and the sequence {yn }n≥1 converges
to y , then k xn − yn kP →k x − y kP as n → ∞.

Lemma 1.7 (See [6], [11]) Let (X, k . kP ) be a CNS, over cone P in E.
Then,

1. int(P ) + int(P ) ⊆ int(P ) and λint(P ) ⊆ int(P ), λ > 0.

2. If c  0 then there exists δ > 0 such that k b k< δ implies b  c

c0
3. For any given c  0 and c0  0 there exists n0 ∈ N such that n0
 c.

4. If an , bn are sequences in E such that an → a , bn → b and an ≤ bn , ∀n,

then a ≤ b.

The proofs of the first two parts of the above Lemma, followed from the
definition of int(P ). The third part is obtained by the second part. Namely,
if c  0 is given then find δ > 0 such that k b k< δ implies b  c. Then find
n0 such that n10 < kcδ0 k andhence nc00  c. Since P is closed, the proof of fourth
part is achieved.

In this paper, we obtain an extension of Theorem 1 through rational expres-

sion. Our obtained result extends and improves the result of Dass and Gupta
[9]. Also we generalized and extended the results of Karapinar [6], Abdeljawad
et.al. [7] for rational type contradiction condition.

2 Main Results
Theorem 2.1 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone Banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,

d(y, T y)(2 + d(x, T x))

d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(x, y) (3)
1 + d(x, y)

For all x, y ∈ C and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ 4α + β < 1, 0 ≤ α + β < 1. Then T has

at least one fixed point.
6 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

Proof: Let x0 ∈ C be arbitrary. Define a sequence {xn } in the following way:

xn + T xn
xn+1 = , n = 0, 1, 2, 3 (4)
2
Notice that
xn + T xn
xn − T xn = 2(xn − ( )) = 2(xn − xn+1 ), (5)
2
Which yields that

d(xn , T xn ) =k xn − T xn kP = 2 k xn − xn+1 kP = 2d(xn , xn+1 ) (6)

For n = 1, 2, 3.. Analogously, for n = 1, 2, 3.. one can get

d(xn−1 , T xn−1 ) = 2d(xn−1 , xn ) (7)

And
1
d(xn−1 , T xn−1 ) = d(xn−1 , T xn−1 ) = d(xn−1 , xn ) (8)
2
And by the triangle inequality

d(xn , T xn ) − d(xn , T xn−1 ) ≤ d(T xn1 , T xn ). (9)

When we substitute x = xn−1 andy = xn in the inequality (4), it implies that

d(xn , T xn )(2 + d(xn−1 , T xn−1 ))

d(T xn−1 , T xn ) ≤ α + βd(xn−1 , xn ) (10)
1 + d(xn−1 , xn )

For all α, β satisfy 0 ≤ 4α + β < 1, and taking into the account of (7) and (9),
which is equivalent to

d(T xn−1 , T xn ) ≤ 4αd(xn , T xn+1 ) + βd(xn−1 , xn ) (11)

By using (10) the inequality (12) turns into

2(1 − 2α)d(xn , xn+1 ) ≤ (1 + β)d(xn−1 , xn ) (12)

Since, 0 ≤ 4α + β < 1, we get

1+β
d(xn , xn+1 ) ≤ 2(1−2α d(xn−1 , xn ) Thus the sequence {xn } is a Cauchy sequence
that converges to some element of C, say z.
To show z is a fixed point of T, it is sufficient to substitute x = z and y = xn
in the inequality (4). indeed, due to the equation (5) and xn → z , we have
T xn → z. Thus,

d(T z, T xn ) ≤ α d(xn ,T1+d(z,x

xn )(1+d(z,T z))
n)
+ βd(z, xn )
COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN CONE BANACH .... 7

Which implies, α d(xn ,T1+d(z,x

xn )(1+d(z,T z))
n)
+ βd(z, xn ) ≤ 0 as n → ∞. Thus, Tz = z
as α + β > 0.
This complete prove of the Theorem.

Corollary 2.2 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone Banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,
d(x, T x)d(y, T y)
d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(x, y) (13)
d(x, y) + d(x, T y) + d(y, T x)
For all x, y ∈ C and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1. Then T has at least one fixed
point.

Corollary 2.3 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone Banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,
d(x, T x)d(y, T y)
d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(x, y) (14)
d(x, y)
For all x, y ∈ C, x 6= y and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1. Then T has at least
one fixed point.

2.1 Common Fixed Point Theorem For Occasionally Weakly

Compatible Type Mappings
The concept of weak commuting maps was given by Sessa [14] introduced
weakly commuting mappings and extended a variety of fixed point theorems
by substituting weakly commutativity by commutativity. Thereafter, a less
restrictive concept called compatibility was introduced by Jungck [15] gave the
concept of compatible maps and showed that weakly commuting mappings are
compatible, but converse is not true. During last few years several fixed point
theorems have been obtained by various authors utilizing this notion. Jungck
further weakened the notion of compatibility by introducing weak ompatibility.
Recently, Rezapour and Hamlbarani [11] were able to omit the assumption of
normality in a cone metric space, which is a milestone in developing fixed point
theory. Lastly, Al-Thagafi and Shahzad [16] defined the concept of occasionally
weakly compatible mappings which is more general than the concept weakly
compatible maps. Now to prove of the theorem we need some definitions which
are as follows:

Definition 2.4 Let S and T be self maps of a set X. If w = S x = Tx, for

some x ∈ X, then w is called a point of coincidence of S and T.
8 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

Definition 2.5 Let X be a cone metric space. A pair of self maps ( S ,T)
is said to be compatible if limn→∞ d(ST xn , T Sxn ) = 0 whenever {xn } is a
sequence in X such that limn→∞ Sxn = limn→∞ T xn = t for some t ∈ X.

Definition 2.6 Let X be any set. A pair of self maps ( S ,T) is said to be
weakly compatible if u ∈ X and S u = Tu imply ST u = TSu.

Remark- 1: It is noted that a compatible maps are weakly compatible but

weakly compatible maps need not be compatible.

Definition 2.7 Let X be any set. A pair of self maps (S, T) is said to be
occasionally weakly compatible (OWC) if u ∈ X which is coincidence point of
S and T at which S and T commute.

Remark- 2: OWC maps need not be weakly compatible.

Example 2.8 Let X = (0, ∞) and d is a usual metric on X. Define S, T :

X → X by Sx = 4x − 3 and T x = x2 for all x ∈ X. Then 1 and 3 are the
only points of coincidence of f and g. Also, ST(1) = 1 = TS(1) but ST(3) =
33 6= 81 = TS(3). Clearly, S and T are OWC but not weakly compatible.

Lemma 2.9 ([1]) Let ( S ,T) be a pair of occasionally weakly compatible

self maps of a set X. If S and T have a unique point of coincidence w = S x
= Tx, then w is the unique common fixed point of S and T.

Theorem 2.10 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,
1. T (C) ⊂ S(C)

2. S(C ) is a complete subspace

3. For all x, y ∈ C and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1,

d(Sy, T y)(1 + d(Sx, T x))

d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(Sx, Sy) (15)
1 + d(Sx, Sy)

Then S, and T have common coincidence point. Furthermore, if S and T are

occasionally weakly compatible, then they have a common fixed point in C.

Proof: Let x0 ∈ X be arbitrary. Since T (C) ⊂ S(C), we can find a point

x1 ∈ C, such that T x0 = Sx1 . Since S, T are self mappings, there is a point
in C, say y0 , such that y0 = T x0 = Sx1 . Inductively we can find a sequence
{y0 } and {x0 } in C in the following way:
COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN CONE BANACH .... 9

yn = T xn = Sxn+1 for n = 0,1,2,3......

When we substitute x = xn and y = xn+1 in (13), it implies that
d(Sxn+1 , T xn+1 )(1 + d(Sxn , T xn ))
d(T xn , T xn+1 ) ≤ α + βd(Sxn , Sxn+1 ) (16)
1 + d(Sxn , Sxn+1 )
which is equivalent to
d(yn , yn+1 )(1 + d(yn−1 , yn ))
d(yn , yn+1 ) ≤ α + βd(yn−1 , yn ) (17)
1 + d(yn−1 , yn )
By simple calculations, (15) turns into
β
d(yn , yn+1 ) ≤ d(yn−1 , yn ) (18)
1−α
Analogously, one can observe that

d(yn−1 , yn ) ≤ kd(yn−2 , yn−1 ) (19)

β
where k = 1−α . Since 0 ≤ α + β < 1,, then 0 ≤ k < 1. Combining (16) and
(17), we have

d(yn , yn+1 ) ≤ kd(yn−1 , yn ) ≤ k 2 d(yn−2 , yn−1 ) (20)

By routing calculations,

d(yn , yn+1 ) ≤ k n d(y0 , y1 ) (21)

To show {yn } is a Cauchy sequence, let n > m. Then by (19) and triangular
inequality, one can obtain

d(yn , ym ) ≤ d(yn , yn−1 ) + d(yn−1 , yn−2 ) + ..... + d(ym+1 , ym ) (22)

km
d(yn , ym ) ≤
d(y0 , y1 ) (23)
1−k
which conclude the prove that {yn } is a Cauchy sequence. Since S(C) is com-
plete, then {yn = T xn = Sxn+1 } converges to some point in S(C), say z. In
other words, there is a point p ∈ C such that Sp = z and T p 6= z. Now by
replacing x with p and y with xn+1 in the inequality (13), we get
d(Sxn+1 , T xn+1 )(1 + d(Sp, T p))
d(T p, T xn+1 ) ≤ α + βd(Sp, Sxn+1 ) (24)
1 + d(Sp, Sxn+1 )
which is equivalent to
d(yn , yn+1 )(1 + d(Sp, T p))
d(T p, yn+1 ) ≤ α + βd(Sp, yn ) (25)
1 + d(Sp, yn )
10 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

As n → ∞, it becomes
d(T p, z) ≤ 0 (26)
which contradiction the hypothesis. So that T p = z. In other words, p is a
coincidence point of S and T.
If S and T are occasionally weakly compatible, then they commute at a coin-
cidence point. Therefore, T p = z = Sp ⇒ ST p = T Sp for some p ∈ C, which
implies T z = Sz.
Claim: z is common fixed point of S and T. To show this, substitute x = p
and y = T p = z in the inequality (13) to give

d(ST p, T T p)(1 + d(Sp, T p))

d(T p, T T p) ≤ α + βd(Sp, ST p) (27)
1 + d(Sp, ST p)
which is equivalent to
d(Sz, T z)(1 + d(z, z))
d(z, T z) ≤ α + βd(z, Sz) (28)
1 + d(z, Sz)
So we have
d(z, T z) ≤ 0
then z = T z = Sz. Suppose the contrary, that w is another common fixed
point of S and T. Substituting x by z and y by w in the inequality (13), one
can get
d(Sw, T w)(1 + d(Sz, T z))
d(T z, T w) ≤ α + βd(Sz, Sw) (29)
1 + d(Sz, Sw)
which equivalent to
d(z, w) ≤ d(z, w)
which is a contradiction since 0 ≤ β < 1. Therefore, the common fixed point
of S and T is unique.
This complete prove of the Theorem.
Remark: In Theorem 2.5, if we take S = T then we get Theorem 2.1.

Example 2.11 Let E = R2 , P = {(x, y) ∈ E : x, y ≥ 0 ⊂ R2 } and k . kP

defined as d : R × R → E by k x − y kP = d(x, y) = (| x − y |, α) where α > 0
is a constant. Define S, T : X → X by
3+2x 1+5x
S(x) = 5
and T(x) = 6
, x∈X
Clearly, (X, k . kP ) is a cone banach space. S and T are OWC and S, T satisfy
the condition (). Also 1 is the unique common fixed point of S and T.
COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN CONE BANACH .... 11

Corollary 2.12 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,
1. T (C) ∩ S(C) 6= φ

2. One of them S(C ) or T(C) is a complete subspace

3. For all x, y ∈ C and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1,

d(Sy, T y)(1 + d(Sx, T x))
d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(Sx, Sy) (30)
1 + d(Sx, Sy)

Then S, and T have common coincidence point. Furthermore, if S and T are

occasionally weakly compatible, then they have a common fixed point in C.

Corollary 2.13 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,
1. T (C) ∪ S(C) ⊆ X

2. One of them S(C ) or T(C) is a complete subspace

3. For all x, y ∈ C and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1,

d(Sy, T y)(1 + d(Sx, T x))
d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(Sx, Sy) (31)
1 + d(Sx, Sy)

Then S, and T have common coincidence point. Furthermore, if S and T are

occasionally weakly compatible, then they have a common fixed point in C.

Corollary 2.14 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,
1. T (C) ⊂ S(C)

2. S(C ) is a complete subspace

3. For all x, y ∈ C , x 6= y and α, β ∈ [0, 1), 0 ≤ α + β < 1,

d(Sy, T y)d(Sx, T x)
d(T x, T y) ≤ α + βd(Sx, Sy) (32)
d(Sx, Sy)

Then S, and T have common coincidence point. Furthermore, if S and T are

occasionally weakly compatible, then they have a common fixed point in C.
12 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

Corollary 2.15 Let C be a closed and convex subset of a cone banach space
X with norm k x kP , and let d : X × X → E be such that d(x, y) =k x − y kP .
If there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1) and T : C → C satisfying the conditions,

1. T (C) ⊂ S(C)

2. S(C ) is a complete subspace

3. For all x, y ∈ C and α ∈ [0, 1),

d2 (Sy, T y) + d2 (Sx, T x)
d(T x, T y) ≤ α (33)
d(Sy, T y) + d(Sx, T x

Then S, and T have common coincidence point. Furthermore, if S and T are

occasionally weakly compatible, then they have a common fixed point in C.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. The present work is done under the Project

No. 2556/MPCOST/Bhopal. We are thankful to MPCOST for providing fi-
nancially support to preparation of this article.

References
[1] Rzepecki B., On fixed point theorems of Maia type, Publications de lIn-
stitut Mathematique, vol. 28 (42), pp. 179-186, 1980.

[2] Lin S. D., A common fixed point theorem in abstract spaces, Indian Journal
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 685-690, 1987.

[3] Huang L.G. and Zhang X., Cone metric spaces and fixed point theorems
of contractive mappings, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applica-
tions, vol. 332, no. 2, pp. 1468-1476, 2007.

[4] Maia M. G.,Unosservazione sulle contrazioni metriche, Rendiconti del

Seminario Matematico della Universit‘a di Padova, vol. 40, pp. 139-
143, 1968.

[5] Khan M. S. and Imdad M. ,A common fixed point theorem for a class of
mappings, Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 14, no.
10, pp. 1220-1227, 1983.

[6] Karapinar E., Fixed point theorems in cone Banach spaces, Fixed
Point Theory Appl. Article ID 609281, 9 pages, 2009,
doi:10.1155/2009/609281
COMMON FIXED POINT THEOREMS IN CONE BANACH .... 13

[7] Abdeljawad T. and Karapma E. and Tas Kenan, Common fixed point
theorems in cone banach spaces, Hecettepe Journal of Mathematics and
Statistics,vol. 40(2), 211-217, 2011.

[8] Jaggi D.S., Some unique fixed point theorems, I. J.P. Appl.,vol. 8, 223-
230, 1977.

[9] Dass B. K. and Gupta S., An extension of Banach contraction principle

through rational expression Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathe-
matics, vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 1455 - 1458, 1975.

[10] Deimling K. Nonlinear Functional Analysis (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Hei-

delberg, New York, Tokyo, 1985).

[11] Rezapour Sh. and Hamlbarani R., Some notes on the paper: Cone met-
ric spaces and fixed point theorems of contractive mappings, Journal of
Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 345, no. 2, pp. 719 -
724, 2008.

[12] Abdeljawad T., Completion of cone metric spaces, Hacettepe J. Math.

Stat. 39 (1), 67-74, 2010.

[13] Turkoglu D., Abuloha M. and Abdeljawad T., Some theorems and exam-
ples of cone Banach spaces, J. Comput. Anal. Appl.vol. 12 (4), 739 -
753, 2010.

[14] Sessa S., On a weak commutativity condition of mappings in fixed point

considerations, Publ. Inst. Math., vol. 32, 149-153 , 1982.

[15] Jungck G., Compatible mappings and common fixed points, Int. J. Math.
and Math. Sci., vol. 9, 771-779, 1986.

[16] Al-Thagafi M.A. and Naseer Shahzad, Generalized I-nonexpansive self-

maps and invariant approximations, Acta Mathematica Sinica, vol.24,
867-876, 2008.

[17] Abdeljawad T. and Karapinar E., Quasi-cone metric spaces and gener-
alizations of Caristi Kirks theorem, Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2009,
doi:10.1155/2009/574387.

[18] Abdeljawad T. and Karapinar E., A common fixed point theorem of a

Gregus type on convex cone metric spaces, J. Comput. Anal. Appl. vol.
13 (4), 609-621, 2011.

[19] Karapinar E., Some fixed point theorems on the cone Banach spaces, Proc.
7 ISAAC Congress, World Scientific, 606-612, 2010.
14 Animesh Gupta and Ramakant Bhardwaj

[20] Karapinar E., Couple fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in
cone metric spaces, Computers and Mathematics with Applications, vol.
59 (12), 3656-3668, 2010.

[21] Karapinar E., Some nonunique fixed point theorems of Ciric type on cone
metric spaces, Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2010, Article ID 123094, 14 pages,
2010, doi: 10.1155/2010/123094.

[22] Karapinar E.,Couple fixed point on cone metric spaces, Gazi University
Journal of Science vol. 24 (1), 51-58, 2011.

[23] Karapinar E. and Yuksel U., On common fixed point theorems without
commuting conditions in tvs-cone metric spaces, J. Comput. Anal. Appl.
vol. 13 (6), 1115-1122, 2011.

[24] Jaggi D.S. and Das B.K.,An extension of Banachs fixed point theorem
through rational expression, Bull. Cal. Math. Soc.,vol. 72 , 261-264,
1980.