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 0, Cited by 5]

National Consumer Disputes Redressal

Ratna Ghosh vs Dr. P.K. Agarwal on 29 March, 2010

  
 
 
 
 
 
 NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION




 

 



 

NATIONAL CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION 

 

NEW DELHI 

 

  

 

 CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.
9 OF 2010 

 

 

 

  

 

Ratna Ghosh

 

D/o Late Sushil Kumar Ghosh

 

17  Nabinpally,

 

Post Office  Orepukur,

 

Rishra, Distt. Hooghly,

 

West Bengal

 

  

 

2. Smt. Jally Dutta

 

 W/o Mr. Kalipada Dutta

 

 Shamashree Pally, Naihati

 

 24, Parganas 

 

 (North, West Begal). ........ Complainants

 

 Vs.

 

1. Dr. P.K. Agarwal 

 

2. Dr. S.N. Basak 

 

 Both of Park
Medicare Centre (P) Ltd. 

 

 30/A/148, Dr.
P.T. Laha Street 

 

 (Bangur Park),
Rishra  712248, 

 

 District 
Hooghly, W.B. 

 

3. Dr. Sabyasachi Bose 

 

 Paramount Nursing
Home 

 

 Maniktola,
Serampore 

 

 District 
Hooghly, 

 

 West Bengal 

 

4. Park Medicare Centre (P) Ltd. 

 

 30/A/148, Dr.
P.T. Laha Street 

 

 (Bangur Park),
Rishra  712248, 

 

 District  Hooghly, W.B. 

 

5. Paramount Nursing Home 

 

 Maniktola,
Serampore 

 

 District 
Hooghly, 

 

 West Bengal 

 

6. Dr. Avik Dey 

 

 Mission of Mercy
Hospital 

 

 Kolkata 

 

 West Bengal 

 

7. Mission of Mercy Hospital 

 

 Kolkatta, 

 

 West Bengal  
Opposite Parties 

 

  

 

 BEFORE :  

 

      HON'BLE
MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA,  

 

PRESIDING MEMBER 

 

      HON'BLE
MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA, MEMBER 

 

  

 

For the Complainants : Mr. T.V. George, Advocate 

 

  

 Pronounced on : 29TH March, 2010 

 

   

 

 ORDER 

PER JUSTICE R.K. BATTA, MEMBER   Heard Counsel for the complainants.

 

The complainants allege negligence on the part of the opposite parties which resulted in premature death of Swapna Ghosh, who was mentally retarded and physically challenged. The complainants claimed a total sum of Rs.2,19,30,000/- with 12% interest thereon. The break of the said claim is as under:

A. Pecuniary Damages: Rs.
I. Expenses for treatment including cost of medicines etc. 89,000.00 II. Funeral Expenses 50,000.00 III. Loss of income of the petitioners 30,000.00 IV. Expenses for travelling 50,000.00 B. Non Pecuniary Loss:
I. For pain and suffering 10,00,000.00 II. Loss of amenities of life 5,00,000.00 C. Exemplary Damages: 2,00,00,000.00 2,17,19,000.00   There is thus mistake in calculation of total loss which is stated to be Rs.2,19,30,000/-. The substantive loss which consists of pecuniary damages is to the tune of Rs.2,19,000/-. Besides this, a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- has been claimed for pain and suffering and Rs.5,00,000/- for loss of amenities of life. In addition, a sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/- is claimed as exemplary damages. No basis or sufficient justification has been given for claiming exemplary damages of Rs.2,00,00,000/- in addition to Rs.15,00,000/- claimed for pain, suffering and loss of amenities of life and we are, prima facie, of the opinion that a highly exaggerated claim has been made in so far as exemplary damages are concerned in order to bring the claim within the jurisdiction of this Commission. The jurisdiction of this Commission to entertain the original petitions is above Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the complainant should approach the appropriate forum having pecuniary jurisdiction by making appropriate claim. In view of this, we are not inclined to entertain this complaint and the complainants are free to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum.
 
..
(K.S. GUPTA, J)  PRESIDING MEMBER ..
(R.K. BATTA, J)   MEMBER k