UNION OF INDIA Vs. B.M. SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 12.07.2012 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (in short, 'the State Commission ') in Appeal No. 250 of 2007 - B.M.Singh Vs. Union of India & Anr. by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that complainant/respondent employee of Norther Railways retired in 1995 and subscribed to RELH (Railway Employees Liberalised Health Scheme) and was entitled for medical reimbursement of himself and his wife. On 30.10.2003, during morning walk, he fell unconscious and was attended to by the passers -by. He was shifted to the emergency of Escort Super Special Hospital and medical stent was implanted. He was discharged on 7.11.2003 and incurred total expenditure of Rs.2,46,576/ -. He submitted bill for reimbursement, but received cheque of only Rs.1,28,500/ - and balance amount was not paid. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. None appeared for OP/petitioner before District Forum and OP was proceeded ex -parte. Learned District Forum allowed complaint and directed OP to pay Rs.1,18,076/ - along with Rs.10,000/ - as compensation and Rs.1,000/ - as litigation expenses. Both the parties filed appeal before State Commission and learned State Commission vide impugned order dismissed both the appeals against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that learned District Forum committed error in allowing complaint ex -parte and learned State Commission further committed error in dismissing appeal without hearing petitioner; hence, revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that as none appeared for the petitioner before District Forum as well as State Commission, learned State Commission rightly dismissed appeal; hence, revision petition be dismissed.