T. S. THAKUR J, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of an order dated 23rd April, 2007 passed by a single Judge of this Court declining an ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff-appellant in a passing off action. A reading of the order in question would show that the learned Single Judge was not inclined to grant an ad interim order till such time the pleadings in the suit were completed. This is evident from the following passage appearing in the said order : ?needless to say that the aforesaid observations made will not prejudice either the disposal of the suit or the disposal of the interim application after the pleadings are completed since they are being made only for the purposes of determination as to whether at this stage an ad interim order is liable to be granted in favour of the plaintiff since the said aspect is pressed by learned counsel for the plaintiff. ? ( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the defendant-respondent submits that the defendant has filed his written statement on 30th July, 2007 under diary No. 96877. He further states that the written statement contains a specific averment to the effect that the averment made in the same may be treated as objections to the interim application for injunction filed by the plaintiff- appellant. He submits that the suit is now coming up before the learned Single Judge for framing of issues and for directions on 11th September, 2007. In that view, therefore, the application filed by the appellant for the grant of injunction under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the CPC can be argued before the Single Judge and orders on the same passed in accordance with law uninfluenced by the view taken by the learned single Judge in the order impugned in the present appeal. ( 3 ) MS. Anand counsel appearing for the appellant on the other hand submits that the plaintiff appellant has not so far received a copy of the written statement allegedly filed by the defendant and that in case a copy of the same is furnished to the plaintiff appellant, the ad interim application for injunction can indeed be argued before the Single Judge on the date already fixed. She submits that so long as the observations made by the Single Judge in the impugned order do not prejudice the hearing and disposal of the said application, the present appeal can be disposed of with appropriate directions for an early disposal of the application filed by the appellant. ( 4 ) THE order under challenge in the present appeal as already noticed earlier, declines to grant an ad interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff appellant, on a prima facie view of the matter. The Court has, while doing so, specifically observed that the said order would not stand in the way of the plaintiff seeking an interim order after the pleadings are complete. Now that the defendant has filed a written statement, there is no impediment in the application for interim injunction being heard and disposed of in accordance with law. ( 5 ) IN the circumstances therefore and keeping in view the submissions made at the bar, we dispose of this appeal with a direction that the appellant shall file the replication to written statement within three days from today subject to the respondent-defendant serving a copy of the said written statement upon ms. Anand during the course of the day today. Learned Single Judge is requested to examine the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders on the application for ad interim injunction filed by the plaintiff uninfluenced by the observations made in the order under appeal. ( 6 ) NO costs. ( 7 ) ORDER dasti.