ORDER : Madan Gopal Vyas, J. By the instant revision petition, under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 petitioner-defendant has challenged order dated 29.08.2018, passed by Senior Civil Judge, Bheem, District Rajsamand (for short, 'learned trial Court'). The learned trial Court, by the order impugned has rejected application of the petitioner-defendant under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC in a suit for permanent injunction laid by respondent-plaintiffs. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant submits while passing the impugned order, the learned trial Court has not examined the matter in its entirety and the impugned order is absolutely vague and non-speaking order. Learned counsel further submits that if the order impugned is allowed to stand then there would be substantial failure of justice. Therefore, it is prayed that the revision petition may be allowed. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the learned trial Court has passed a reasoned order and no interference is warranted. 4. From perusal of the impugned order, it is apparently shows that none of the objections made in the application under Order 7, Rule 11 read with 151 CPC has been dealt with by learned trial Court and only while mentioning the arguments of the respective parties, without giving any cogent findings, the learned trial Court straight way rejected the application. 5. In view of the above, it is clear that the order dated 29.08.2018 is non-speaking one and the same is not sustainable. 6. Resultantly, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to learned Court below for deciding the application of the petitioner-defendant under Order 7, Rule --11-- CPC afresh after providing opportunity of hearing to both the parties strictly in accordance with law.