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

ASHOK BHAN, VINEETA RAI
PARMARTH MISSION HOSPITAL – Appellant
Versus
YUDH VIR CHAUHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Neeraj Dutt Gaur, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. J.K. Bhola, Advocate, for the Respondent

ORDER

Mrs. Vineeta Rai, Member - Being aggrieved by the order of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in Complaint No. C-375 of 1998, two cross-appeals have been filed. While First Appeal No. 744 of 2007 has been filed by Manager, Parmarth Mission Hospital, opposite party, First Appeal No. 16 of 2008 has been filed by Shri Yudh Vir Singh Chauhan, Original Complainant before the State Commission seeking enhanced compensation. Since the facts and the parties in both appeals are common/similar arising out of the same consumer complaint, it is proposed to dispose of these appeals by one common order by taking the facts from First Appeal No. 744 of 2007. The parties will be referred to in the manner in which they were referred to in the complaint i.e. Shri Yudh Vir Singh Chauhan as Complainant and Parmarth Mission Hospital as opposite party.

2. In the complaint against opposite party-Hospital, Complainant had stated that his wife (hereinafter referred to as the Patient), who had earlier been admitted in the opposite party-Hospital and delivered two children in the same Hospital, was admitted for delivery in the opposite p

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