( 1 ) IN this writ petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 2-2-1980 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Hassan Division, hassan, in case No. DRA 11/79-80. ( 2 ) BY the aforesaid impugned order, the Assistant Commissioner while vacating the earlier order of temporary injunction dated 28-1-1980, has further directed that the parties to maintain the status quo regarding possession of the land in question bearing S. No. 279/13 of Koravangala village, dusda Hobli, Hassan Taluk, until further orders. ( 3 ) IT was contended on behalf of the petitioner and also on, behalf of respondent-2 that there is no provision contained in the Karnataka Debt Relief ordinance, 1979, hereinafter referred to as Karnataka Ordinance No. 19 of 1979, enabling the Assistant Commissioner to pass interim orders of the nature in question pending disposal of the proceeding instituted before him under the provisions of the Ordinance, therefore, it was submitted that the orders dated 2-2-1980 and 28-1-1980 (Exts. A and B respectively) are without jurisdiction. ( 4 ) FOR the purpose of deciding the aforesaid contention, the necessary facts of the case are as follow: after the promulgation of the Karnataka Ordinance No. 19 of 1979, the petitioner has filed an application under s. 13 of the said Ordinance before the assistant Commissioner, Hassan, for a declaration that the sale effected in favour of respondent-2 by the petitioner was in the nature of a mortgage and for other reliefs as contemplated under the provisions of the said section. In that proceeding, the petitioner filed an application for an interim order restraining respondent-2 from interfering with his alleged possession. The assistant Commissioner on 28-1-1980 passed an ex parte order of temporary injuction restraining respondent-2 from entering the land in question. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 put in appearance and filed an application for vacating the order of temporary injunction. The Assistant, Commissioner, by the order dated 2-2-1980 (Ext.-A) while vacating the order of temporary injunction dated 28-l-1980 (Ext. B) has further directed the parties to maintain the status quo regarding the possession of the land in question until further orders. It is the validity of this order which is questioned in this writ petition. ( 5 ) S. 13 of the Karnataka Orinance no. 19 of 1979 reads as follows:"sec. 13. B) has further directed the parties to maintain the status quo regarding the possession of the land in question until further orders. It is the validity of this order which is questioned in this writ petition. ( 5 ) S. 13 of the Karnataka Orinance no. 19 of 1979 reads as follows:"sec. 13. Power of the Assistant commissioner to declare transfer purporting to be a sale to be in the nature of mortgage. (1) Any debtor may within one year from the date of commencement of this ordinance, make an application to the concerned Assistant Commissioner that any transfer of immovable property made by him or any other person through whom he inherited it was a transfer in the nature of mortgage and the Assistant Commissioner may, after such enquiry as he deems fit, if satisfied that the circumstances connected with the transfer showed it to be in the nature of a mortgage, then, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law, custom or contract declare such transfer to be a mortgage. (2) When the Assistant Commissioner makes any such declaration, the applicant shall, notwithstanding anything contained in clause (6) of sec. 2, be deemed to be a debtor, and if it was incurred prior to the commencement of this Ordinance, the debt covered under that mortgage shall be deemed to be wholly discharged and the provisions of subsection (2) of section 5 shall mutatis mutandis apply for recording redemption of such mortgage and delivery of possession of such property. (3) For the purpose of any enquiry under sub-section (1) the Assistant commissioner may exercise all or any of the powers conferred on him under the Karnataka Land Revenue act, 1964 and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. (4) The order of the Assistant commissioner shall subject to any order in revision under section 14 be final. (3) For the purpose of any enquiry under sub-section (1) the Assistant commissioner may exercise all or any of the powers conferred on him under the Karnataka Land Revenue act, 1964 and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. (4) The order of the Assistant commissioner shall subject to any order in revision under section 14 be final. (5) Nothing in this section shall apply to: - (i) a transfer which has been finally adjudged to be a transfer, other than a mortgage, by a competent court; (ii) any bonafide transferee for value without notice of the real nature of such transfer or his representative; (iii) any transfer made prior to 1st march 1974; (iv) a transfer in respect of which a proceeding is pending under Sec. 23 of the Karnataka Agricultural debtors Relief Act, 1966 (Karnataka act 29 of 1966) to declare that it is in the nature of a mortgage. "thus it is clear from the aforesaid sub-section (3) of S. 13 of the ordinance that the Assistant Commissioner may, for the purpose of enquiry under Sub. S. (1) thereof exercise all or any of the powers under the Karnataka land Revenue Act, 1964 and follow such procedure as may be prescribed. Sub-sec. (1) of S. 13 provides for holding an enquiry into the application in order to rind out whether the transfer of the immovable property concerned in the proceeding was in the nature of a mortgage or not. If as a result of an enquiry the Assistant Commissioner is satisfied that the circumstances connected with the transfer showed it to be in the nature of a mortgage, he may then declare it to be a mortgage. Sub-section (2) of S. 13 further provides that on such declaration being made, the applicant shall be deemed to be a debtor and then the debt covered by that mortgage shall stane discharged and the possession of the mortgaged property will have to be directed to be delivered to the mortgagor by the creditor (mortgagee) or his heirs, legal representatives and assigns. Thus sub-section (1) of S. 13 makes it clear that the enquiry that is contemplated is an enquiry into the application for the purpose of granting final relief in the matter and not tor the purpose of passing an interim order of the nature in question. Thus sub-section (1) of S. 13 makes it clear that the enquiry that is contemplated is an enquiry into the application for the purpose of granting final relief in the matter and not tor the purpose of passing an interim order of the nature in question. Sec. 11 of the Ordinance also provides that in enquiries under the ordinance, the Assistant Commissioner shall have to follow the same procedure as is specified for a summary enquiry under S. 34 of the Karnataka Land revenue Act, 1964. As per sub-sec. (3) of S. 13 of the Ordinance, the Rules known as the Karnataka Debt Relief rules, 1979, have been framed. The procedure prescribed by the aforesaid rules for the purpose of holding an enquiry into the applications made under Ss. 4 and 13 of the Ordiance is also interred for the purpose of granting final relief only. Thus there is no provision contained in the Karnataka ordinance 19 of 1979 or in the Rules framed thereunder enabling the Assistant Commissioner to pass interim orders of the nature in question. Passing of an order of temporary injunction or directing the parties to maintain the status-quo thereby affecting the rights of the parlies without there being a final determination in the matter is not permissible either under the Ordinance or under the Rules framed thereunder. It is also not possible to hold that such interim orders are necessary for the purpose of holding an enquiry into the application made under S. 4 or 13 of the Ordinance in order to find out whether the applicant is entitled for the relief under the aforesaid provisions. Neither the enquiry into the main application nor the granting of relief to the applicant depends upon such interim orders. ( 6 ) THUS the Assistant Commissioner while exercising the powers, performing the functions and discharging the duties under the Karnataka Ordinance 19 of 1979 and the Rules framed thereunder does not enjoy any power to pass the interim orders of the nature in question. But this should not be understood to mean that the Assistant Commissioner has no power to pass any interim order in the proceeding instituted either under S. 4 or under S. 13 of the Karnataka Ordinance 19 of 1979. But this should not be understood to mean that the Assistant Commissioner has no power to pass any interim order in the proceeding instituted either under S. 4 or under S. 13 of the Karnataka Ordinance 19 of 1979. The interim, orders such as calling for the production of the documents, issuing witness summons, bringing the legal representatives of the applicant and also the heirs, legal representatives and assigns of the creditor on recored. which are necessary for the purpose of holding an enquiry into the application made under S. 4 or S. 13 of the Ordinance and for granting relief under those provisions can very well be passed by the Assistant Commissioner; but he does not enjoy any jurisdiction to pass an interim order which is not necessary for the purpose of holding an enquiry into the applications and granting the relief under the aforesaid provisions of the Ordinance. The interim orders challenged in this writ petition fall within the latter category as the same are not necessary either for the purpose of holding an enquiry or for granting the relief under S. 13 of the ordinance. ( 7 ) FOR the reasons stated above, it is clear that the order of temporary injunction dated 28-1-1980 and also the order directing the parties to maintain the status quo dated 2-2-1980 (Exts- a and B respectively) are without jurisdiction and are liable to be quashed. Consequently the writ petition is allowed and the aforesaid impugned orders Exhibits-A and B are hereby quashed. --- *** --- .