State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs Loknete Rajarambapu Patil Hospital & ... on 2 June, 2015
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
Log
No.02/2015 to 883/15 and Log No.372/2015
The Oriental Insurance
Co.Ltd.
Through Divisional Manager, Satara Divisional
Office,
Jeevantara, LIC Building, Opp.Collector
Office, Powai Naka, Satara.
...........Revision Petitioner(s)
Versus
Loknete Rajarambapu Patil
Hospital & Research Centre
Uran-Islampur, Sangli Road,
Islampur, Tal.Walwa, Dist.Sangli through Secretary, Nishikant Prakash
Patil
............Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
P.B.Joshi, PRESIDING JUDICIAL
MEMBER
Dhanraj Khamatkar, MEMBER For the Appellant:
Adv.R.N.Kulkarni For the Respondent:
Adv.Sarjerao Patil ORDER Per Mr.P.B.Joshi, Presiding Judicial Member [1] Heard Adv.R.N.Kulkarni for the revision petitioner and Adv.Sarjerao Patil for the respondent at length.
[2] Matters are filed as revision petitions. After hearing both the sides and after perusing the record, we are of the opinion that the revision petitions are not tenable for the reasons that the complaints have been disposed off by considering the material on record. The contention of advocate for the revision petitions that the District Forum, Raigad had no jurisdiction. However, the matters were transferred to District Forum, Raigad by the State Commission and the said order is in record. Advocate for the revision petitioner has conceded the said position.
[3] Another contention is that no opportunity was given to the Revision Petitioner as no notice was given to the Revision Petitioner after the matter was transferred and hence no evidence was led by the Revision Petitioner. However, record shows that the advocate for the revision petitioner was present before District Forum, Raigad on 22/08/2014 and next date given was 10/10/2014. It means that there is no substance in contention that no opportunity was given to the opponent/revision petitioner. It was necessary for the revision petitioner to file the appeal against the order of the District Forum, Raigad disposing the matter on merit by withdrawing the matters.
[4] At this stage, advocate for the revision petitioner sought permission to withdraw all these revision petitions. Permission is granted to withdraw these revision petitions. All these revision petitions [Log No.2/15 to 883/15 and Log No.15/372] stand disposed off as withdrawn. No order as to costs.
[5] One set of revision petitions compilations be retained. Rest be returned to the revision petitioner forthwith.
[6] Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith.
Pronounced Dated 2nd June, 2015.
[ P.B.Joshi] PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER [ Dhanraj Khamatkar] MEMBER pgg