JAYENDRA MAGANLAL PADIA Vs. LALIT P TRIVEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was the complainant before the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad (in short, 'the State Commission') in consumer complaint No. 84 of 1993. By the impugned order, the State Commission dismissed the complaint against all the Opposite Parties (OPs) except Dr. Ashok Nathwani, consulting paediatrician (OP 2) at the Navalben Maniram Virani General Hospital, Rajkot (hereafter, "the OP 4" or, "the Hospital"). The State Commission found Dr. Nathwani, OP 2 in the complaint, guilty of medical negligence to a limited extent in treating the complainant's young son Hiren and directed him to pay the complainant a compensation of Rs. 10,000 with cost of Rs. 2,000. Aggrieved, the complainant is in appeal before us. For convenience, we continue to refer to the parties according to their status before the State Commission. It was brought to the notice of this Commission during the appeal proceedings that Dr. Nathwani had expired in the intervening period. By order dated 25.5.2007, this Commission directed that the proceedings would, therefore, abate against OP 2 but the liability of the OP 4 for the omissions, etc., if any, of OP 2 would continue to be subject to examination, for which the learned Counsel for OP 4 would get an opportunity to be heard. Complainant's case

(2.) THE case of the complainant before the State Commission needs recapitulation in some detail for proper appreciation of the disputes:

(3.) ALL OPs (except OP 2) contested the allegations in the complaint before the State Commission.