M. Thanikachalam J. - (1.) Heard. The 1st respondent, in this Revision Petition, as complainant, has filed a complaint before the District Forum, Theni, for the recovery of a sum of Rs.6,00,000/-, as compensation, for the wrongful medical advice and treatment said to have given by the opposite parties. As per the cause of action available in the last paragraph of the complaint, the cause of action had arisen on 30.10.2000 and generally that must be the actual date of cause of action, giving cause of action for the complainant, to proceed against the doctor, on the alleged medical negligence. But the complaint was filed only on 21.1.2008, that is more or less after the delay of seven years.
(2.) The opposite party before filing the written version, it seems, challenged the maintainability of the case, in which an order came to be passed, which was challenged before this Commission in R.P.No.58/2008, questioning the maintainability of the case. This commission, as per the order dt.26.8.2008, issued directions, and permitted the 1st opposite party to file an application, before the District Forum, raising preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the complaint, such as barred by limitation, without filing an application to condone the delay under Sec.24A of the Consumer Protection Act.
(3.) Pursuant to the direction issued by this commission, it appears the 1st opposite party filed a petition in CMP.No.164/2008, which was not diligently prosecuted, then dismissed for default. After some time, the 1st opposite party, to restore the said petition, filed a petition in CMP.No.179/2008, and the same was opposed, and finally the said petition came to be dismissed by the District Forum on 23.10.2008, which is under challenged in RP.78/2008.;