The exercise of powers by the Vacation District Judge was regulated by a High Court notification, and the Court found that there was no urgency involved in the matter, leading to an irregular exercise of jurisdiction.

( 1 ) BOTH the Advocates submitted that the revision itself may be heard finally on merits. Accordingly arguments are heard and the revision is disposed of.

( 2 ) THE respondent- landlord filed an eviction petition in in H. R. C. 8 of 1979 on the file of the munsiff, Hospet, against the revision petitioner under Section 21 (1) (b) and (j) of the Karnataka rent Control Act. The Munsiff dismissed the said H. R C. case on 5-9-1983. The respondent, being aggrieved by that order, approached the District Judge with H. R. C. Revision 21 of 1983. The District Judge, Bellary, on 7-8-1985 set aside the order passed by the Munsiff and ordered eviction and gave time to the tenant till 30th April 1986 to vacate. It appears that the revision petitioner, being aggrieved by that older, filed on 15-4-1986 a revision petition in C. R. P. 1926 of 1986 in this Court.

( 3 ) THE Civil Courts were closed for summer vacation for the period from 21-4-1986 to 25-5-1986 (both days inclusive ). During the vacation period, the respondent filed an execution case 14 of 1986 in the Court of the Vacation Judge on 6-5-1986 and obtained an order under order 21 Rule 35 of the Code of Civil Procedure for possession of the property. The delivery warrant was executed on 12-5-1986 and the respondent was put in possession of the property. The revision petitioner; being aggrieved by the said order, has come up with this revision.

( 4 ) THE learned Counsel Sri Savanur submitted that the District Judge could not have entertained an execution petition during summer vacation and thus could not have passed an order under order 21 Rule 35 of the Code of Civil Procedure and thus the subsequent act of delivery of possession to the respondent by the Court bailiff was bad at law. His argument that the District judge could not have entertained a civil proceeding during vacation does not appear to be correct.

( 5 ) SECTION 28 of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act reads, as

"28. Vacation :- (1) and (2) xx xx xx (3) Notwithtanding anything contained in this Act or in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908) :- ( a) the High Court, may, where there are more than one District Judge in any District Court, designate by notification any one of those District Judges as the Vacation District Judge for the duration of the adjournment of any District Court in summer ; (b) where there is only one District Judge in any District, the High Court may, by notification, designate such District Judge or appoint a Civil Judge in the District as the Vacation District judge or the Vacation Civil Judge, as the case may be, of the District Court thereof for the duration of the adjustment of such District Court in summer or part thereof. The High Court may regulate, by special or general order, work to be discharged by the Vacation civil Judge or the Vacation District Judge. 4 (a) The local limits of the jurisdiction of the Vacation District Judge or Vacation Civil Judge shall be the same as those of the District Court concerned. (b) The jurisdiction of the Vacation Civil Judge shall extend to all suits, appeals and other proceedings pending in, or cognizable by any Civil Court (whether a District Court, a Civil judge's Court or a Munsiff's Court) in the District concerned when such Court is adjourned for summer vacation. (5) The place at which the Court of the Vacation District Judge or the Vacation Civil Judge shall be field, shall be the same as the place at which the District Court concerned may be held. The vacation District Judge or the Vacation Civil Judge shall have such administrative control over the staff of the several Civil Courts in the District, as the High Court may, by general or special order, determine. (6) Notwithstanding the appointment of the Vacation District Judge or the Vacation Civil Judge, every Civil Court in the District shall, during the period it is adjourned for summer vacation, be deemed to be closed for the purposes of Section 4 of the Limi