Two questions had been referred to the Full Bench for opinion, namely: (I) Whether a revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure lies to the High Court from a revisional order made by a District Judge under sub section (2) of section SO of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1967, as substituted by Karnataka Act 3 1 of 1975? and (2) Whether the ruling of the Full Bench of that Court in Krishnaji Venkatesh Shirodkar vs Gurupad Shivaram Kavelekar, (supra) requires reconsideration in view of the ruling of the 345 Supreme Court in Vishesh Kumar vs Shanti Prasad?, ; The learned Chief Justice of the High Court who spoke for the Full Bench noticed the decision in Krishnaji 's case as also the view expressed by this Court while disposing of the special leave petition and stated: If the matter had rested here, there would not have been any controversy, but after the decision of the Full Bench in Krishnaji Venkatesh Shirodkar 's case, two decisions of the Supreme Court have been rendered, i.e., one in Vishesh Kumar 's case and the other in Aundal Ammal vs Sadasivan Pillai, ; It was on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Vishesh Kumar 's case that the questions posed by the Division Bench had to be referred for decision to a larger Bench.