SATVIR SOLANKI Vs. A.C. KHOSLA
LAWS(DELCDRC)-2009-3-6
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on March 04,2009

Satvir Solanki Appellant
VERSUS
A.C. Khosla Respondents

JUDGEMENT

J.D.KAPOOR,PRESIDENT (ORAL) - (1.)THE grievance of the appellant is that the District Forum has not afforded an opportunity of being heard nor pleas raised by the appellant and the documents produced by the appellant were taken into consideration and scanned by the District Forum as the District Forum dismissed the complaint vide impugned order dated 27th December, 2008 merely on the stand taken by the respondent that the cause of bend in the left arm while joining the fracture was that he had suffered bone fracture earlier and therefore the deformity, if any, is the result of the injury earlier suffered by the appellant.
(2.)THE grievance appears to be justified as the order is not a speaking order. None of the documents produced by the appellant have been referred to and relied upon though he has produced the documents relating to the treatment taken by him from Safdarjung Hospital, Apollo Hospital, etc. The order needs to be reproduced, which reads as under: "In brief, complainant's case is that his left arm was fractured and, therefore, he approached OP Dr. A.C. Khosla for treatment of his left fractured arm. It is alleged by the complainant that due to his left arm fracture having not joined properly, he suffered a bend (error) and, therefore, he has filed this complaint against OP for the alleged medical negligence in the treatment given to him for which he has sought compensation. OP Dr. A.C. Khosla in his reply pleaded that complainant in his left arm had suffered a bone fracture earlier also which fact he mentioned in his first prescription dated 8.3.2004. OP's defence has been that the deformity if any in the left arm is the result of the injury suffered by the complainant in his left arm prior to his having taken the treatment from 8.3.2004 onwards from him. This complaint thus has no merit and is hereby dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own cost."
(3.)THE order is very cryptic, sketchy and does not take care of the contentions raised by the appellant and the documents produced by him nor has any expert medical opinion has been obtained as to the cause for bad joining of the fracture causing bend in the arm. Appeal is allowed at the outset, impugned order is set aside and the matter is sent back to the District Forum for deciding it afresh on merits by way of speaking and reasoned order by discussing and dealing with all the documents produced and the contentions raised by the appellant.
Appellant shall appear before the District Forum on 31.3.2009 for the aforesaid purpose.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.