Full Bench clarifies limited scope of answering referred questions, remits matter for decision on merits.

The Full Bench emphasized the need to answer only the questions of law referred to it and remitted the matter back to the Division Bench for a decision on merits.

---

---

Issues involved: Suit for declaration of paternity, rejection of DNA test application, appeal under Article 227, reference to Full Bench for hearing.

Issue 1: Suit for declaration of paternity
- The plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge to declare him as a son of the defendant.
- Defendant contested the suit by filing a written statement.
- Plaintiff moved an application for conducting a DNA Test, which was rejected by the trial court.

Issue 2: Rejection of DNA test application
- Plaintiff, aggrieved by the rejection, filed a writ petition under Article 227, which was dismissed.
- The plaintiff then preferred a Special Appeal, which was referred to a Full Bench for hearing.

Issue 3: Appeal under Article 227 and reference to Full Bench
- The Division Bench referred the appeal to the Full Bench due to the questions involved.
- The Larger Bench examined the order of reference and noted the absence of specific points or questions of law referred to it.
- Citing previous judgments, the Full Bench emphasized that it is required to answer only the questions formulated and referred to it.
- The Full Bench remitted the matter back to the Division Bench for deciding on merits.
- The Full Bench reiterated that it is bound to answer only the questions referred to it and nothing beyond that.
- The Full Bench refrained from answering the reference due to the absence of specific points or questions of law.
- The matter was remitted to the Division Bench for further proceedings.

Conclusion: The Full Bench emphasized the need to answer only the questions of law referred to it and remitted the matter back to the Division Bench for a decision on merits.

---