-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 478 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3920 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 3143 OF 2008 Heinz India (P) Limited ).. Appellant Versus Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare Limited ).. Respondent Mr Iqbal Chagla, Senior Counsel, a/w Mr Darias Khambatta, Senior Counsel, Mr Venkatesh Dhond, Mr Manish Desai, Ms Deepti Mohan, Mr Arpan Sarkar, Ku Kushal Mor, Ms Boski Sharma i/b Paras Kuhad for the Appellant. Mr Ravi Kadam, Senior Counsel, a/w Mr Vinod Bhagat, Mr Punit Jani and Mr Dhiren Karania i/b G S Hegde and V A Bhagat for the Respondent. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & S. A. BOBDE, J. DATED : 2ND DECEMBER 2008 P.C. During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant Mr Chagla, produced the study papers referred to in the impugned advertisements, to which an objection was raised and it was argued that these contentions or materials were not produced before the learned Single Judge when the Notice of Motion at an ad- -2- interim stage was being heard. 2. After some arguments, this Appeal is not pressed before us. However, subject to the submission that the prima facie view recorded in the impugned order may not be taken into consideration for the purposes of final disposal of the Notice of Motion, which is stated to be fixed on 18th December 2008, and further keeping in view the seriousness of the matter, the learned Counsel for the Appellant prayed that the matter be heard on 18th December 2008, the date fixed before the learned Single Judge. To this, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent has no objection. 3. In view of the above, this Appeal is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the learned Counsel appearing for the parties to press their request before the learned Single Judge for disposal of the Notice of Motion on 18th December 2008. We are clear in our mind, that the impugned order being at an ad-interim interlocutory stage, would no way influence the view of the learned Single Judge when hearing the Motion for final disposal. The Appellant is obviously at liberty to file additional documents/rejoinder within one week from today. Appeal disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. -3- 4. In view of the disposal of the Appeal, nothing survives in Notice of Motion No.4090 of 2008 and the same is disposed of as infructuous. CHIEF JUSTICE S. A. BOBDE, J.