Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.84 seconds)

Indian Medical Association vs V.P. Shantha & Ors on 13 November, 1995

Learned counsel for the appellant next contended that the present case involves complicated question of facts for which experts including doctors would be required to be examined and their cross- examination may be necessary, therefore also, the National Commission ought to have directed the complainant to approach the Civil Court. For this purpose, the reliance is placed upon the decision of this Court in Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha and others [(1995) 6 SCC 651 para 37] and it is submitted that in the present case complicated question of fact involving negligence of doctors is to be decided and, therefore, complainant should be directed to approach the Civil Court. In the aforesaid case, the Court rejected the said contention and observed thus:
Supreme Court of India Cites 44 - Cited by 575 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Charan Singh vs Healing Touch Hospital & Ors on 20 September, 2000

Further, while rejecting the similar contention where the complainant was directed to approach State Commission or District Forum, this Court in Charan Singh v. Healing Touch Hospital and Others [(2000) 7 SCC 668] observed that appellant ought not to have been condemned unheard after waiting for six long years; the legislative intent, for enacting the legislation, of a speedy summary trial, to settle the claim of the complainant (consumers) has been respected in breach. The spirit of the benevolent legislation has been overlooked and its object frustrated by non-suiting the appellant in the manner in which it has been done by the National Consumer Forum. It was further observed that "the Consumer Forums must take expeditious steps to deal with the complaints filed before them and not keep them pending for years. It would defeat the object of the Act, if summary trials are not disposed of expeditiously by the forums at the District, State or National levels. Steps in this direction are required to be taken in the right earnest".
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 220 - Full Document
1   2 Next