TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ull Bench has answered the question referred to it by the Division Bench and while answering the question referred to it, the Full Bench itself decided the case on merits. The grievance of the appellant herein is that in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Kesho Nath Khurana Vs. Union of India and Others 1981 (Supp) SCC 38 and Kerala State Science Technology Museum Vs. Rambal Co. and Others (2006) 6 SCC 258, the Full Bench should not have gone on the merits of the matter and the Full Bench should have after answering the reference remitted the matter back to the Division Bench for deciding the Civil Revision Petition. 4. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that a Reference was made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merits of the matter. He, however, submitted that in view of the law laid down by this Court in the cases of Kesho Nath (supra) and Kerala State Science (supra) the Full Bench should not have decided the revision petition on merits and after answering the reference made to it by the Division Bench, it should have remitted the revision petition to the Division Bench for decision in accordance with law. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant appears to be correct. 8. In the case of Kesho Nath (supra), in almost identical situation, this Court has taken the view that when a reference is made to a larger Bench, the larger Bench should answer the reference and thereafter remit the case to the appropriate Bench for decision on me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Judge with the answer rendered by them to the question referred by the single Judge and left it to the single Judge to dispose of the second appeal according to law. 10. Same view was reiterated by this Court in the case of Kerala State Science (supra). In that case this Court after referring to earlier decisions in para 8 held as under :- It is fairly well settled that when reference is made on a specific issue either by a learned Single Judge or Division Bench to a larger Bench, i.e., Division Bench or Full Bench or Constitution Bench, as the case may be, the larger bench cannot adjudicate upon an issue which is not the question referred to. 11. In the case at hand also, almost an identical situation had taken place that a r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
