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

K.D.SHAHI, SURENDRA KUMAR, LUXMI SINGH
KUMUD GARG – Appellant
Versus
RAJA BHATIA – Respondent


Counsels for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. T.S. Bindra and Mr. Manoj Kohli, Advocates.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.D. Shahi, Chairman—These are two connected appeals one by Dr. Kumud Garg (hereinafter called the appellant) and the other by Sh. Raja Bhatia (hereinafter called the complainant) arising out of judgment and order dated 31.5.2000 whereby the learned Forum has allowed the compensation of Rs. 50,000/- plus Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation against appellants. While the complainant has filed the appeal for the enhancement of the compensation so granted. Both the appeals arise out of the same judgment and order, therefore, both are taken together for disposal.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant has taken his daughter Kajal of the age of two and a half years to the opposite party for operation of her right eye. According to the complainant Dr. Kumud Garg was working with Shri Ganga Mata Charitable Eye Hospital and Research Institute, Saptrishi Link Road, Haridwar, opposite party No. 2. It is said that the vision in both the eyes was proper but there was some pressure in the right eye for which the complainant had taken his daughter Kajal for treatment to the appellants. After examination Dr. Kumud Garg told that the eye is to be oper


















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