National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Amar Jain Hospital & 3 Ors. vs Devkinandan Soni & Anr. on 15 October, 2015
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI FIRST APPEAL NO. 801 OF 2015 (Against the Order dated 15/06/2015 in Complaint No. 08/2014 of the State Commission Rajasthan) 1. AMAR JAIN HOSPITAL & 3 ORS. THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AMAR BHAWAN, CHAURA RASTA, JAIPUR-3020003 RAJASTHAN 2. SHRI UMRAO MAL CHORADIA, PRESIDENT, SHREE AMAR JAIN MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY, AMAR BHAWAN, CHAURA RASTA, JAIPUR-3020003 RAJASTHAN 3. SHRI PADAM CHAND DHADDA SECRETARY, SHREE AMAR JAIN MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY, AMAR BHAWAN, CHAURA RASTA, JAIPUR -302003 RAJASTHAN 4. DR. ARJUN JAIN, C/O. AMAR JAIN HOSPITAL, AMAR BHAWAN, CHAURA RASTA, JAIPUR-302003 RAJASTHAN ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. DEVKINANDAN SONI & ANR. (FATHER OF DECEASED NITIN SONI) S/O. SHRI LIKHMI CHAND SONI, R/O. PLOT NO. 46, SHYAM VATIKA, JAIISINGHPURA KHOR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN 2. SMT. SUMAN SONI W/O. DEVKINANDAN SONI, R/O. PLOT NO. 46, SHYAM VATIKA, JAISINGHPURA KHOR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER For the Appellant : Mr. Manu Mridul, Advocate For the Respondent :
Dated : 15 Oct 2015 ORDER JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) 1. Counsel for the appellants is present. Arguments heard.
2. There is a delay of 72 days in filing this appeal. The intention is to delay the case unnecessarily. The application for impleadment should have been moved at the earliest possible stage. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay is allowed subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as cost which be paid to the complainant, Shri Devkinandan Soni. We are of the considered view that notice should not be issued to the complainant as it will entail further time.
3. The OP has moved an application for impleadment of the insurance company. The State Commission denied his request and passed the following order:
"Whereas the issue of professional indemnity insurance policy obtained by Dr. Arun Jain is concerned, this issue is between the insurance company and Dr. Arun Jain. If in case the Dr. Arun Jain is found to be liable for professional negligence and if any of award is passed against him, then also he can get it indemnified by the insurance company. This agreement is between Dr. Arun Jain and the insurance company. Complainant could not be bound to make the insurance company as a party and then prove their claim against it also. The decision which has been referred to by the counsel for the applicant in the application, in that too the insurance company has only been treated as a proper party not the necessary party. According to our opinion complainant cannot be bound to array the insurance company as a necessary and prove their case against them. Therefore, this application is not acceptable. Therefore, this application is dismissed."
It is difficult to fathom why the request was denied which was made at an early stage. Secondly, in view of judgment of this Commission i.e. Dr. C.C. Choubal Vs. Pankaj Srivastava the application should have been allowed. It will also restrain the multiplicity of the litigation. The doctor will have to file a separate case against the insurance company. Consequently, we accept the appeal and direct that the insurance company be impleaded as one of the parties in this case. Complainant be directed to amend the petition and insurance company be summoned as per law. The case be expedited.
4. The appellants are directed to appear before the State Commission on 19-10-2015. Costs be paid before the State Commission on the date fixed.
Dasti order be given on 16-10-2015.
......................J J.M. MALIK PRESIDING MEMBER ...................... DR. S.M. KANTIKAR MEMBER