VIJIL Vs. AMBUJAKSHI T.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are Doctors practicing Modern Medicine in Kannur, have filed this writ petition seeking to quash Exts.P4 and P6 orders of the District and State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions, as sans jurisdiction and hence illegal. The petitioners also pray to declare that the Consumer Fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 do not have jurisdiction to take cognizance of complaints in respect of medical negligence and deficiency in medical service, as medical profession and practice do not come within the purview of the term 'service' defined under Sec. 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

(2.) The petitioners state that C.C. No.202/2020 was filed in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kannur alleging that the complainant therein consulted the 1st petitioner, who diagnosed cataract in her left eye. There was no relief. The complainant was sent to other opposite parties. After the treatment by the opposite parties, the complainant lost the sight of her left eye. The complainant alleged that loss of eye sight was due to medical negligence and sought for a compensation of ₹32,52,000/-.

(3.) On receipt of notice, the petitioners filed Ext.P2 I.A. No.92/2020 challenging the maintainability of C.C. No.202/2020 as medical service will not fall within the ambit of Sec. 2(42) of the Act, 2019. The District Commission dismissed the I.A. as per Ext.P4 order dtd. 10/3/2021. Ext.P5 Revision Petition filed by the petitioners challenging Ext.P4 was dismissed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission as per Ext.P6 judgment dtd. 25/8/2021.