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

Geetha Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Anita Ranjan – Respondent


ORDER

P.K. Shamsuddin, President - This complaint is filed under sections 12 and 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, claiming a total compensation of Rs.4 1akhs from the opposite party.

2. The material allegations in the complaint can be summarised as follows:-

The complainant went to the Opposite Party's Clink with fever and redness of eyes for treatment on 1.5.1991. The opposite party without proper examination of the complainant and proper diagnosis of the ailments she was suffering from, started treatment without care and caution and rashly and negligently administered medicines and also gave injections. Consequently vasicular lashes were caused to be developed on the body of the complainant. The complainant again met the Opposite Party on 3.5.1991. The Opposite Party without proper examination wrongfully diagnosed the ailments of the complainant as chicken-pox and directed the complainant to go to infectious diseases hospital at lranimuttam. When the complainant mentioned to the opposite party that there was no possibility of her getting the infection of chicken-pox, the opposite party gave a letter addressed to another Doctor. The complainant by that time became very weak and the



























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