{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2615 OF 2011 Kishan s/o Jalbaji Wade Petitioner Versus Shakuntalabai w/o Purbhaji Wade and others Respondents Mr.A.P.Bhandari, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Vivek Bhavthankar, advocate for respondents no.1 to 4. CORAM : S.S.SHINDE, J. DATE : 16th November, 2011 PER COURT: Heard learned Counsel for respective parties. It appears that by the impugned order, the learned trial Judge rejected the application below Exhibit­182 on the ground that earlier similar application was filed and, therefore, said application needs no consideration. From perusal of order at Exhibit­H of the compilation, it is clear that the said order is passed by the learned trial Judge taking recourse to the order passed below Exhibit­180. However, from perusal of order dated 03.01.2011, it is difficult to understand as to how the order at Exhibit­H of the compilation can be passed taking recourse to the order dated 03.01.2011, passed below Exhibit­180. Upon hearing learned Counsel for the respective {2} parties, I am of the considered opinion that the learned Judge should have heard the said application on merits and then should have passed reasoned order. However, the impugned order passed below application at Exhibit­182 is without assigning any reasons and said application is rejected merely on the ground that similar application is already entertained. In the aforesaid background, the impugned order dated 25th February, 2011 passed below Exhibit­182 is quashed and set aside. Said application is restored to its original file. The Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, is directed to hear the said application afresh on its own merits and after giving proper opportunity to the parties, pass the order. Writ Petition stands disposed of in above terms. S.S.SHINDE JUDGE adb/wp261511