( 1 ) THE following two questions have been referred to be decided by a iarger bench :-" (1) Whether a rev. ision under section 115 of the Code of Civ. il Procedure lies to the High Court from a rev. isional order made by a District judge under sub-section (2) of Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent Control act, 1961, as substituted by Karnataka act 31 of 1975 ? (2) Whether the ruling of the Full bench of this Court in Krishnaji venkatesh Shirotiker v. Gurupad Shiv. ram kavalekar (I. L. R. 1978-2 Karnataka 1585) requires reconsideration in view of the ruling of the Supreme Court in visthsh Kumar v. Shanti Prasad (Air 1980 SC 892) ? "

( 2 ) THIS petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution calling in question the legality of the order made by the District Judge under sub-section (2) of Section 50 of the karnataka Rant Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred 10 as 'the Act' ). An office objection was raised as to how in v. iew of the Full Bench decision of this court in Krishnaji Venkatesh Shirodkar v. Gurupad Shiv. ram Kavalekar (ILR (Karnataka) 1978 (2) 1585) a petition under article 227 of the Constitution was maintainable. Before the Learned Sin