( 1 ) "you cannot", they say, "have the cake and eat it too". But a plaintiff who obtains a temporary injunction against a defendant eats the cake even before getting it. It is obvious, therefore, that temporary injunction, for instance, under Order XXXIX Rule 2 granted by the learned single Judge to the plaintiff respondent against the defendant appellant in this case can be justified only if it was based on a good prima facie case made out by the plaintiff showing that in all probability the plaintiff was entitled to obtain ultimately the permanent injunction sought by it as could appear at this stage before going into evidence from the pleadings and the admitted documents. The appellant contends that no prima facie case was made out by the respondent and the temporary injunction should be vacated in the appeal. We must, therefore, first see the facts and the pleadings, and the law applicable on such facts to know if a good prima facie case was made out to justify the grant of temporary injunction. THE FACTS:

( 2 ) THE plaintiff carries on business of inspecting merchandise with a view to assess their quality and claims that it has established reputation and goodwil