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

R.K.AGRAWAL, S.M.KANTIKAR
Raj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Rajeev Jain – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1: Nemo
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha, Advocate

ORDER

Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Member.—This Revision Petition is filed by the Petitioner / Complainant under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Order dated 19.12.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), which allowed the Appeal and set aside the Order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as the ‘District Forum’) and consequently dismissed the Complaint.

2. Briefly stated the facts are that on 10.04.2010, the Complainant Rajkumar injured his left leg in the road accident. He was examined and was treated by an Orthopedician, Dr. Rajeev Jain (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Opposite Party No. 1’) at Dr. Narender Memorial Murti Nursing Home at Baraut and then he was operated on 17.04.2010. The Complainant did not get relief. It was alleged that the plates fixed in the leg were not set properly. Therefore, on 9.11.2010, another operation was conducted by the Opposite Party No. 1, even then there was no cure. Thereafter, the Opposite Party No. 1 refused to treat the patient further. Therefore, 3rd operation was done by Dr. Tomar at Raksha Hospital in

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