JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 27.05.2014 passed by the trial court, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the trial court. 2. During pendency of the suit, the petitioner-plaintiff filed applications under Order 8, Rule 6C CPC, under Order 7, Rule 14 CPC and another application with regard to deficiency in the court fee on the counter claim filed by the respondent. 3. The trial court by its order dated 20.10.2012 accepted the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 14 CPC and rejected the application filed by the petitioner raising objection regarding valuation of the counter claim and ordered that the counter claim was legally maintainable and it was not necessary to file a separate suit and fixed the matter for admission denial and framing of issues. 4. The petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12285/2012 against the order dated 20.10.2012 and the said writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 24.07.2013. 5. The petitioner thereafter filed an application raising objection before the trial court, inter alia, questioning the dismissal of application under Order 8, Rule 6C CPC alleging that the order was passed without hearing the arguments and without any discussion and, therefore, the trial court needs to hear the application again and decide the same on merits. 6. The application was opposed by the defendant-respondent. The trial court after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that the petitioner was well aware of passing of the order as he had obtained copy of the order for filing the writ petition and after the writ petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the High Court, the application has been filed and as the order was passed after hearing the parties on all the applications, there was no question of passing a fresh order on application under Order 8, Rule 6C CPC. 7. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial court was not justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner, inasmuch as, a bare look at the order dated 20.10.2012 reveals that the same does not contain any discussion pertaining to application under Order 8, Rule 6C CPC and straightaway an order has been passed holding that the counter claim was legally maintainable and it was not necessary to file a separate suit and, therefore, the order impugned passed by the trial court cannot be sustained. 8. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material placed on record. 9. A bare look at the proceedings reveals that after passing of the order dated 30.12.2012 the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12285/2012 and it was specifically noticed by this Court in its order dated 24.07.2013 rejecting the writ petition filed by the petitioner that the petitioner was aggrieved against rejection of application under Section 8 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 read with Order 8, Rule 6C CPC; the petitioner was well aware of passing of the order dated 20.10.2012 by the trial court and after rejection of the writ petition on 24.07.2013, the petitioner chose to file application on 13.01.2014 before the trial court seeking rehearing of his application under Order 8, Rule 6C CPC. 10. From the above, it is apparent that the petitioner was well aware of disposal of the application by order dated 20.10.2012 and once the writ petition filed by the petitioner against the said order containing the disposal of three separate applications was within his knowledge, which the petitioner chose not to question while filing the writ petition, the present application filed by the petitioner seeking rehearing of the application under Order 8, Rule 6C CPC was not maintainable. 11. In view of the above, the order passed by the trial court does not call for any interference. There is no substance in the writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******