JUDGMENT : Devinder Gupta, J. Heard. 2. We have been taken through the impugned order, plaint and the memorandum of understanding. Learned counsel for the plaintiff appellant has also referred to section 44(2) of the Trademarks Act. 3. Learned Single Judge by the impugned order dismissed plaintiff-appellant's application under order 39 rules 1 and 2, CPC and allowed defendant-respondent's application filed under Order XXXIX Rule 4, CPC after making some observations with which the appellant is aggrieved. Such observation in our view made while disposing applications under order 39 rules 1 and 2, CPC or under order 39 rule 4 CPC, are prima facie in nature and cannot proclude the plaintiff-appellant from seeking appropriate relief on merits of the claim made in the plaint and also cannot come in the way of plaintiff appellant proceeding on merits other proceedings stated to be pending in Alipore Court. Insofar the impugned order, learned Single Judge while allowing defendants application under order XXXIX rule 4, CPC and dismissed appellants application has given cogent reasons and in appeal we are not inclined to interfere with the discretion exercised, which is not shown to have been exercised arbitrarily or perversely. Dismissed.