PREM NATH HOSPITAL Vs. POONAM MANGLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prem Nath Hosptial, Gurgaon-opposite party in the complaint filed by Smt. Poonam Mangla has filed the present revision petition for quashing the proceedings allegedly conducted by the learned President of the District Forum sitting singly i. e. , without the junction of the other two Hon'ble Members of the Forum. In order to substantiate his submission, the authorised rep resentative of the revision petitioner has placed on record the copies of all the interim orders passed by the learned President of the District Forum, Gurgaon starting from the very first date of hearinhg i. e. , 22nd of June, 1993 onwards. From a perusal of these proceedings, the submission of the revision petitioner did not automatically get substantiated, inasmuch as, it was not clear as to whether actual proceedings of the complaint were conducted by the learned President of the District Forum sitting singly or proceedings had been conducted with the junction of one or two Hon'ble Members of the District Forum and only the short orders (minutes of the interim proceedings) were signed by the President alone. Faced with this, the authorised representative of the petitioner provided before us the orders passed by the Hon'ble National Commission in number of other cases, including the revision petitioner i. e. , Revision Petition No.894 of 1994, Dr. Prem Nath V/s. Union of India and Another, decided on 18th of July, 1995, in which the Hon'ble National Commission had set aside the orders passed by the then President of this Commission sitting singly. The orders of the Hon'ble National Commission reads as under : "the impugned orders passed in these cases have to be set aside on the short ground that they have been passed by the President of the State Commission sitting singly without the junction of any other Member as is mandatorily required under the provisions of the Act. The Revision Petitions are accordingly allowed and the orders of the State Commission are set aside. "

(2.) On the other hand, Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, learned Counsel for the complainant-respondent has submitted that in fact the proceedings had been conducted by the learned President of the District Forum with the junction of one or two Hon'ble Members and if the interim orders had been signed by the President of the District Forum alone, that was no violation of any statutory provision.

(3.) In order to ascertain the exact factual position with regard to the proceeding's conducted by the learned District Forum, we sent for the original records of the case as also report of the learned President of the District Forum. So far as the records are concerned, the minutes of the various proceedings of the case are no doubt signed by the President, but from that it cannot be inferred that the other Hon'ble Members of the Forum were not present when those proceedings were conducted. However, the report of the learned President of the District Forum is reproduced below : "the entire proceedings in case CPA No.354 of 22.6.93, Poonam Mangla V/s. M/s. Prem Nath Hospital, 2002 3 CPJ 353 have been conducted in the presence of Members or one of the Members. However, the signatures of the Members are obtained whenever any effective or contested interim order is passed. In this case two contested interim orders were passed-one on 25.8.94and the other on 21.8.95 and besides the signatures of the undersigned the signatures of one Member are also there. The signature of Ajay Mangla witness was also recorded in the presence of the Members but the signatures of the Members were not obtained. "