IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.31 OF 2008 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.31 OF 2008 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.31 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.29 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.29 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.29 OF 2008 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO.9274 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.9274 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.9274 OF 2007 M/s.Shiv Santosh Dugdhalaya ..Appellant. V/s. Mr.Yashwant D. Purandare ..Respondent. Mr.Nitin A. Kulkarni for appellant. Ms.Smita Gayadhani for respondent. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. The appellant in the present appeal takes exception to the legality and correctness of the order dated 17th December, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.9274 of 2007 declining interim relief to the appellant though in the Writ Petition Rule was granted. 2. At the very outset, the contention raised by the appellant is that no reason whatsoever has been given in the impugned order for declining the relief of interim prayer and, therefore, the order is liable to - = : 2 : = - be set aside. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent states that she has no objection if the said order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge while keeping all the contentions of the parties open. 4. In view of the stand taken by the respondent and the fact that the Writ Petition before the learned Single Judge is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, we set aside the order dated 17th December, 2007 and remand the matter to the learned Single Judge. Parties would be at liberty to raise all the contentions as may be permissible in law. 5. Appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. 6. In view of the disposal of the appeal, the Civil Application has become infructuous and hence disposed of as such. CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE - = : 3 : = - J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J.