SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Cal) 33

N.K.BHATTACHARYYA
MRIDULA PURAKASTHA – Appellant
Versus
KALIKA SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ganesh Srivastava, S.N.MUKHERJEE, SABYASACHI SEN

N. K. BHATTACHARYYA, J.


( 1 ) MR. Ganesh Shrivastava, learned Advocate, enters appearance on behalf of the opposite party No. 1 and files his Vakalatnama in Court today. Let it be kept on record.

( 2 ) HEARD the submissions of the learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. S. N. Mukherjee appearing with the learned Advocate Mr. Sabyasachi Sen and the learned Advocate for the opposite party No. 1, Mr. Ganesh Shrivastava. Considered the materials on record.

( 3 ) BY this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who is a doctor, challenged the Order No. 15, dated 14th December, 1995, passed by the President and a Member of the District Redressal Forum, North 24-Parganas, Barasat, in D. F. C. Case No. 90 of 1994, whereby the learned Forum allowed the petition of the petitioner in that proceeding for restoration by restoring the proceeding to its original file and number after the matter was contested by the opposite party therein.

( 4 ) THE fact, briefly stated, is that the opposite party No. 1 herein was a patient of the petitioner herein and the petitioner herein performed an operation of dichotomy on her and it is alleged that due to rash and neglige









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top