The National Commission's revisional jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act is limited to correcting jurisdictional errors or material irregularities; it does not extend to re-appreciating evidence or acting as an appellate court where concurrent findings of fact exist.

ORDER

DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J

1. The relevant facts of the present case are that Bapi Gope, a minor child of the respondent no 1/the complainant/Sanjoy Kumar Gope (hereinafter referred to as ‘the complainant’) was a student of 3rd standard suddenly fell down on 28.11.2002 when he was participating in long-jump event during a school sports programme. The complainant brought his son to New General Hospital Behramore and got admitted under supervision of the appellant/the opposite party/Dr. Amiya Kumar Bera (hereinafter referred to as ‘the opposite party’). The complainant as per advice of the opposite party got conducted investigation of his son such as X-ray etc. and thereafter the opposite party opined that the left leg of the son of the complainant got fractured. The opposite party without any operation put plaster was put on leg and the son of the complainant discharged from the hospital at the instance of the opposite party on 21.12.2002. The complainant was asked to pay Rs. 500/- as major Operation Theater (OT) charges. The complainant initially opposed to pay Rs. 500/- as no such operation was conducted but the hospital authority detained the son of the complainant in the hospital. Thereafter, the complainant finding no alternate paid Rs. 500/- towards major O.T. charges and got his son discharged his son from the hospital on 22.12.2002. The opposite party instructed the complainant to bring his son for follow up on 22.01.2003 and the opposite party examined son of the complainant. The complainant also attended the opposite party on 05.03.2003 and the opposite party asked the complainant to bring his son in his private chamber where son of the complainant could be treated properly. The complainant has taken his son to the private clinic of the opposite party on 04.04.2003 where son of the complainant was treated by the opposite party. The opposite party charged his professional fee and advised the complainant to take assistance of a physiotherapist. The opposite party during treatment advised the complainant to get admitted his son in the hospital and accordingly son of the complainant was got admitted in the hospital on 30.04.2003. There was no improvement in the condition of his son and thereafter the complainant being ex-employee of defence department brought to his son to Command Hospital, Kolkata and got admitted his son on 03.05.2003 who was discharged from the Command Hospital on 23.05.2003. The complainant was provided with summary note wherein it was mentioned that ‘MALUNITED Fracture, subtrochanteric Lt. Femur (OPTD)’. The authority of Command Hospital also certified that earlier left leg of the son of the complainant was not operated and was operated in the Command Hospital for first time. The opposite party was negligent in treating the son of the complainant and illegally charged alleged operation theater fee and there was deficiency in service in attending son of the complainant. The opposite party did wrong diagnose and gave wrong medicines were to son of the complainant only to grab the money. The minor son of the complainant due to medical negligence on the part of the opposite party has become partially handicapped and suffered mental shock due. The complainant being aggrieved filed present consumer complaint bearing C.C. No. 07/2004 titled as Sanjoy Kumar Gope V Dr. Amiya Kumar Bera before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murhshidabad, Berahmpore (hereinafter referred to as ‘the District Forum’) wherein prayed that the opposite party be directed to pay compensa