1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.303 of 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6412/2009 WITH CAL NO. 348/2009 in LPA 303/2009 Bayer (I) Ltd. ....Appellant v/s. Cynthiya Misquitta & anr. ....Respondents Mr. K.M. Naik i/b. P.N.Anaokar & R.D. Oak for the appellant. Mr. M.D.Nagle for the respondents. CORAM:- SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED:- December 15, 2009. P.C. We have heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the parties. The contention raised before us is that the order dated 12th November, 2009 does not give any reasons whatsoever for granting and/or refusing the interim order prayed. It is further contended that the order does not clarify whether the stay of the reinstatement has been granted or declined. 2 2. Be that as it may, we do not wish to consider the merits of this case. Keeping in view the decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of M/s. Pipe Arts India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shri Gangadhar N. Golmare-2008 (6) MhLJ 280, we set aside the order dated 12th November, 2009 and remand the matter for adjudication in so far as grant or refusal of the interim order and reasons thereof is concerned. Let the matter be placed before the Learned Single Judge for reconsideration of grant or refusal of interim relief. The Appeal is disposed of. Parties to appear before the Learned Single Judge on 5th January, 2010. 3. Application does not survive for consideration. Hence, disposed of. CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.KHANWILKAR, J