( 1 ) THE short question raised in this petition is whether a special general meeting called for considering the no-confidence motion against the Vice-President of the Honnavar Municipality could be adjourned for another date to consider the said motion. In my view, the answer to the said question should be in the affirmative. ( 2 ) S. 42 (9)OF the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, (shortly called "the Act") provides the procedure for moving resolution expressing want of confidence either on the President or the Vice-President of a Municipal council. It reads as follows :" 42 (9 ). Every President and every Vice-President of a Municipal council shall forthwith be deemed to have vacated his office if a resolution expressing want of confidence in him is passed by a majority of not less than two-thirds ol the total number of councillors at a special general meeting convened for the purpose : provided that. . . . . . . . . Provided further that where a resolution expressing want of confidence in any president of vice-president has been considered and negatived by a municipal council, a similar resolution in respect of the same president or Vice-President shall not be given notice of or moved within one year from the date of the decision of the Municipal Council". ( 3 ) THE meeting contemplated under the above sub-sec. is a special general meeting of the Municipal Council. There are two kinds of meetings provided under S. 47 of the Act. One is ordinary general meeting and another is special general meeting. S. 47 (4) provides :"any meeting may be adjourned until the next or any subsequent date, and an adjourned meeting may be further adjourned in like manner". Any meeting referred to under the above Section may be an ordinary general meeting or a special general meeting. The circumstances under which such meetings could be adjourned, are provided under Section 56. It states :"56. Subject to such rules as may be prescribed, any general meeting may, with the consent of a majority of the councillors present, be adjourned from time to time to a later hour on the same day or to any other day; but no business shall be transacted at any adjourned meeting other than that left undisposed of at the meeting from which the adjournment took place. A notice of such adjournment posted in the municipal office shall be deemed sufficient notice of the adjourned meeting". ( 4 ) THE above section, when it refers to general meeting goes without saying that it may be an ordinary general meeting or a special general meeting. Any such meeting could be adjourned with the consent of a majority of the councillors present. ( 5 ) FROM the above provisions, it is clear that a special general meeting could be adjourned in accordance with S. 56. That is what has been done in the instant case. The resolution expressing want of confidence was set dqwn for consideration in the meeting held on 31-10-1973. It was adjourned to 17-11-1973 and again adjourned to 30-11-1973 and further adjourned to 31-12-1973 and finally to 31-1-1974, on which date the resolution was passed expressing want of confidence by 2|3 majority of the councillors. All those meetings were adjourned in accordance with the provisions of S. 56. The contention of Mr. Eswarappa that S. 42 (9) is a self contained one and is not governed by S. 56, cannot therefore be accepted. ( 6 ) IN the result, the rule is discharged, but no costs. Mr. Ramakrishna, High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file his memo of appearance for respondent-1 within two weeks from today. --- *** --- .