Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Amir Ali Mondal vs Dhanyakuria Block Unnito Prathamik ... on 24 March, 2017

  	 Cause Title/Judgement-Entry 	    	       STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION  WEST BENGAL  11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087             Revision Petition No. RP/101/2015  (Arisen out of Order Dated 20/03/2015 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/136/2013 of District North 24 Parganas)             1. Amir Ali Mondal   S/o, Lt. Monammad Ali Mondal, Vill & P.O - Begampur, P.S - Basirhat, Dist - North 24 Pgs, Pin - 743 437. ...........Appellant(s)   Versus      1. Dhanyakuria Block Unnito Prathamik Swastha Kendra   Swastha Kendra (BPHC, Dhanyakuria), Vill & P.O - Dhanyakuria, P.S - Basirhat, Dist - North 24 Pgs, Pin - 743 437.  2. DR. Monoj Kumar Murai  Dhanya Kuria, Block Unnito Prathamik Swastha Kendra, P.O - Dhanyakuria, P.S - Basirhat, Dist - North 24 Pgs, Pin - 743 437.   3. DR. (Mrs.) Sarbari Roy (Biswas)  Vivekananda Road, P.O & P.S - Barasat, Kolkata - 700 124.  4. The Registrar, West Bengal Medical Council.  8, Lions Range, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700 001.  5. The Superintendent, Basirhat Sub Divisional Hospital.  Badartala, P.S - Basirhat, Dist - North 24 Pgs. ...........Respondent(s)       	    BEFORE:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS PRESIDENT    HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY MEMBER          For the Petitioner: Mr. Avijit Gope Mr. Amalendu Das , Advocate    For the Respondent:          None appears      Dated : 24 Mar 2017    	     Final Order / Judgement    
 

ISHAN CHANDRA DAS, HON'BLE PRESIDENT             This Revisioned Application (being RP/101/2015) has been filed questioning the propriety of the order being Order No. 46 dated 20.03.15 passed by Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum North 24 Parganas, Barasat, in connection with CC No. 136/2013. The original complaint case being CC/136/2013 was filed before the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, North 24 Parganas claiming compensation for professional misconduct and violation of professional ethics , mental agony and pain due to the negligence in the treatment of the Revisionist  herein who happened the father of victim Renubibi. The Victim (Renubibi) was admitted to Dhanyakuria Block Unnito Prathomic Swasths Kendra (BPHC)  Dhanyakuriya , Bashirhat  as a patient under the OP No. 3 of the claim case and she was admitted for delivery at the advanced stage of her pregnancy and consequently  she delivered  a living male child  but ultimately the mother / victim succumbed due to the post delivery complications  arose in course of such delivery. The Revisionist herein in course of trial, as it appears from the averments of the Revisional application dated 16.07.15. (RP/101/2015)  in order to establish his contentions  filed an application before Forum concerned for cross examining the OP No. 2 but Ld. Forum below did not favourables consider his prayer and rejected the same with certain observations.

 

          The Revisional application was filed questioning the propriety of the order on the ground that Ld. Forum concerned failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by law and has acted in exercise of its jurisdiction illegally and / or with material irregularity. But the fact remains that the proceeding under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 is  virtually a summary procedure for giving prompt reliefs to the Consumers and the stage of recording evidence by calling the witnesses to the witness box and cross examining them , as it is done in the regular courts, is not permissible in case of trial under the Consumer Protection Act . Hon'ble National Commission in Dr. Uttam Kumar Samanata - vs-  Bharti Airtel Ltd., and Ors. reported in 2014 (3) CPR 664 (NC)  categorically held the above and  in the back-ground, taking into consideration the legal position over the matter, we find no substance in the argument as advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the Revisionist . Hence, the order impugned does not  require any interference and it stands  up-held . We make no order as to costs. Let the copy of this order be sent to the Ld. Forum concerned at once for further proceeding of the complaint case being CC /136/2013 . Parties to appear before the Ld. Forum concerned  by 26.04.2017 . The Revisional application being RP/101/2015 is thus disposed of.      [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS] PRESIDENT   [HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY] MEMBER