M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The Revision Petitioner, as complainant, approached the District Forum, in C.C.No.12/2007. seeking certain reliefs, against the opposite parties, who are the respondent in this Revision, alleging as if they have committed medical negligence elsewhere in the year 1997, which is pending since the doctors have opposed the case, on various grounds.
(2.) Pending disposal of the case, the opposite parties have filed a petition CMP.No.81/2010, seeking a prayer as follows: pray this Honourable Forum that the summons may kindly be issued to the expert witnesses for inspection of all records in the above case, to examine the Abdomen (Front, Back and Sides) of the complainant and then permit them to file Proof Affidavits to arrive at a just and fair decision in the above case which was opposed, by filing the counter by the complainant, who was the respondent in that CMP.
(3.) The District Forum, considering the rival contentions of the parties, felt that Dr.J.Ruby Pramela, had taken scan, which has disclosed the presence of the kidney, as the case may be, can be examined, further observing that on production of the copies of documents, they may be sent to Jipmer Hospital, Pondichery, for inspection, for the opinion of urologist expert, as per the order dt.5.7.2010. After the said order, on 16.7.2010, as represented and as seen from the records also, the opposite parties have filed a memo, stating, that it may not be necessary for them to examine the Urologist, thereby the have not pressed the said relief, granted by the District Forum in CMP.No.81/2010, thereby retaining the examination of Dr.J.Ruby Premila alone. The memo was accepted by the District Forum. Thus aggrieved, the revision has been filed, by the complainant.;