IMPORTANT POINT
Delay of 159 days in filing of revision petition cannot be condoned.

This Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”), has been filed by Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences & Research Centre, Ernakulam, and its functionary, Opposite Parties No. 1 and 2 respectively in the Complaint, against the order dated 29.06.2015, passed by the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Thiruvananthapuram (for short “the State Commission”) in Appeal No. 529 of 2013. By the impugned order, while endorsing the view taken by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Ernakulam (for short “the District Forum”) to the effect that the Petitioners herein were negligent in treating Respondent No.1/Complainant, the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal.

2. The Appeal had been preferred by the Petitioners, questioning the correctness and legality of the order dated 26/28.11.2012, passed by the District Forum in Complaint Case No. 259 of 2009, preferred by Respondent No.1, alleging medical negligence on the part of the Petitioners. By the said order, the District Forum, while allowing the Complaint, had directed Respondent/Opposite Party No.3, i.e. National Insurance Company Ltd., to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs.2.25 Lakhs along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the Complaint till realization and Rs.1.00 Lakh as compensation for mental agony and sufferings undergone by the Complainant. Besides, Petitioner/Opposite Party No.1 was also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant as costs of the proceedings.

3. The Complainant, who was working as a Machine Operator in Kerala Rubber & Reclaims Ltd., Ernakulam, for the last 35 years, was suffering from high spiking fever and pain in the joints since 2004, for which he had taken treatment from various hospitals in and around Ernakulam. When the Complainant did not get any respite from the treatment, he contacted Opposite Party No.2, the Head of the General Medicine in the Opposite Party No.1/Hospital, where without subjecting him to clinical examinations/investigations, treatment for Anti-Tuberculous Treatment (ATT) was started on 16.05.2007. In the opinion of Opposite Party No.2, the Complainant was suffering with Disseminated Tuberculosis with Tuberculosis Pericarditis. Though the said treatment continued for two months, the condition of the Complainant did not improve, whereupon he was shifted to Lakeshore Hospital, Maradu, where the Complainant was diagnosed to be suffering from Drug Induced Hepatitis, Septicemia with Poly Serositis, due to ATT by Opposite Party No.2. In the said background, the Complainant filed the Complaint before the District Forum, praying for a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- along with interest @ 12% p.a.

4. It is pointed out by the Office that this Revision Petition is barred by limitation, inasmuch as there is a delay of 159 days in filing the same. An Application, praying for condonation of the said delay, has been filed along with the Revision Petition. In paragraphs 4 – 6 of the said Application, the Petitioners have furnished the following explanation:

“4. It is submitted that the Revision Petitioners received the copy of the impugned order during the third week of September 2015 and thereafter the Revision Petitioners forwarded the copy of the impugned order for legal opinion to the counsel, who is based in Trivandrum, Kerala State, to ascertain the possibility of filing Revision Petition in the above matter and accordingly during the last week of December 2015, upon the receipt of legal advice from the counsel, the Revision Petitioners sent the case records to the present counsel for the Revision Petitioners at Delhi.

5. It is submitted that since the matter is pertaining to medical negligence, the counsel for the Revision Petitioners requested the Revision Petitioners to provide the copies of documents and evidence adduced in the matter and the same was provided by the Revision Petitioners on 14.03.2016. It is submitted