1. Heard Smt. Anjali Bajpai Dube, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr V.D. Gunale, learned Counsel for respondent no.1.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. At the request and by consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

3. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the original plaintiff has challenged the order dated 22.10.2012, passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Latur, below Exh. 144/D, in Special Civil Suit No.164 of 2006. By the said order, the learned Trial Judge rejected the application at Exh.144/D preferred by the original plaintiff seeking permission to deliver the interrogatories for the second time.

4. The instant writ petition involves a short point, viz. whether the interrogatories under Order 11, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short “C.P.C.”) be delivered to the same party second time or not ?

5. Perused impugned order and the material on record. At the outset, it is to be noted that the learned Trial Judge has considered only legal aspect of Order 11, Rule 1 of the C.P.C. and has not considered interrogatories on merits. The