NILESH G. NIMAVAT Vs. MEDIPICKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986(for short, 'Act'), by the Petitioner/Complainant there is challenge to order dated 23.08.2010, passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad (for short,'State Commission') in (First Appeal No. 422 of 2010).

(2.) Petitioner had filed a Consumer Complaint against the Respondents/Opposite Parties on the allegations that he being a doctor, pursuant to the representation of the respondents, purchased a C-Arm Image Intensifier X-Ray Machine from them for a sum of Rs.6,30,000/- After the installation of the said machine in the operation theater, petitioner performed operation with the help of the said machine. It is alleged by the petitioner that during the usage of the machine, he felt dizziness and suffered nausea, headache, redness of eyeballs and swelling, which are symptomatic of having absorbed excess quantity of X-Rays. Thereafter, again on next occasion petitioner used the said machine for a longer period in the operation, then again he developed the aforesaid problem. The said health problem occurred due to the extra emission of X-Rays. Therefore, petitioner complained about the same to the respondents. The employees of the respondents did visit but could not repair the machine and rectify the said problem. Hence, it is alleged that the respondent had supplied defective machine and not rectified the machine. Therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.

(3.) Notices issued by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Additional), Rajkot (for short, 'District Forum') were duly served upon the Respondents. However, they did not file any written statement and as such their right was closed. Thereafter, they did not appear before the District Forum.