(1.) This revision under Sec. 21(b) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is in challenge to the Order dtd. 12/4/2018 of the State Commission in revision no. 56 of 2015 arising out of the Order dtd. 16/4/2015 of the District Commission in complaint no. 173 of 2014.
(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and have perused the record. No one is present for the respondent.
(3.) The case is of alleged medical negligence. The short point involved herein relates to the preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction. The District Commission at Maharajganj vide its Order dtd. 16/4/2015 arrived at the conclusion that the cause of action in part arose within its territorial jurisdiction. The State Commission made its independent appraisal and vide its impugned Order dtd. 12/4/2018 arrived at the same conclusion that the cause of action in part arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the said District Commission.