ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. On 12-10-1994, the respondent who was a minor at that time suffered a fracture of his hand. The respondent was taken to the appellant by his father since the appellant held himself out to be a qualified medical practitioner. The appellant bandaged the respondents hand and prescribed some medicines. The respondent was in acute discomfort. He was taken back to the appellant who rebandaged his hand. Ultimately, the respondent was taken to other doctors. However, by this time it was stated that damage to the respondents hand was permanent. On the basis of this allegation a complaint was lodged by the respondent before the District Forum under the Consumer 9 Protection Act. The District Forum was of the view that the issue ought to be decided by the civil court and accordingly rejected the complaint. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed an appeal before the State Commission. The State Commission allowed the appeal and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs 1,50,000 by way of compensation, Rs 20,000 on account of treatment and Rs 5000 as costs of litigation. The National Commission rejected the revision petition filed by the appellant by holding that there