PARDEEP SETH Vs. ASHOK SARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainants have come up in appeal against the order dated 8th May, 1996 passed by learned District Forum, Ambala, whereby their complaint against Dr. Ashok Sarwal and United India Insurance Company has been dismissed by relegating them to the remedy of Civil Court, as it required the examination of medical experts and other witnesses for the proper adjudication of the case.

(2.) According to the complainants, one Raghu Nath Seth suffered fracture in femur bone in an accident and was treated by the respondent Dr. Ashok Sarwal in his hospital where he was operated upon on 23rd June, 1995 and discharged thereafter. Three months later the patient died and according to the complainants, there was negligence in the rendering of medical services to the deceased in performing operation and due to unhygienic condition of the hospital. Aggrieved by this, the complainants approached the District Forum, Ambala for claiming Rs. one lac alongwith Rs.3,99,000/- on account of loss caused to the heirs from Dr. Ashok Sarwal and the United India Insurance Company. In their reply, the respondents took preliminary objections that lot of evidence would be required to be examined the complicated and disputed questions of facts were involved, hence it was not a fit case for consideration by the District Forum. Upholding the preliminary objection, learned District Forum dismissed the complaint by relegating the complainants to the remedy of Civil Court.

(3.) In the appeal before us, Mr. Mohinder Singh Advocate appearing on behalf of appellants has vehemently contended that the broad facts regarding the injury suffered by the deceased, his treatment in the hospital of Dr. Ashok Sarwal and the operation done by the Doctor were not in dispute. Therefore, the only question for the determination of the learned District Forum was as to whether there was any negligence on the part of the Doctor in the treatment of the patient before, during and after the operation or not. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent has vigorously pleaded that since it was a case of disputed questions of facts and it would require recording of the evidence, learned District Forum had rightly relegated the complainants to the remedy of Civil Court. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the order passed by the learned District Forum can not be upheld. In each and every case which comes to the Court, some dispute or facts as well as interpretation of law is always there, which is generally resolved by the scrutiny of the pleadings as well as appreciation of evidence produced by the parties. The same is the position under the Consumer Protection Act, wherein specific provisions have been made for recording of the evidence by way of affidavits and otherwise. Therefore, it would be in the fitness of thing that instead of relegating the complainants to the remedy of Civil Court the learned District Forum decides the case on the material produced by the parties by way of evidence. Consequently, the appeal is allowed, order of the learned District Forum dated 8th May, 1996 is set aside and the parties through their learned Counsel are directed to appear before learned District Forum, Ambala on 17th February, 1997.