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

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 1507

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
DR. JAYKUMAR S/O ASHWINKUMAR DIXIT – Appellant
Versus
MANOHAR BAPURAO KHORGADE – Respondent
SC/CB2/27/A/124/2019



Petitioner Advocates:ADV.S.S.DESHPANDE ,Respondent Advocate:

##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

CIRCUIT BENCH NAGPUR

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/CB2/27/A/516/2018

SHRI. MANOHAR BAPURAO KHORGADE

PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O. FLAT NO. A/10/5, N.S.K. SOCIETY, RAVI NAGAR, CIVIL LINES,

NAGPUR-440 001,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus

DR. JAYKUMAR DIXIT

PRESENT ADDRESS - MEDICAL PRACTITIONER, R/O. 101/102, NANDINI GARDEN

APARTMENTS INFRONT OF CONGRESS NAGAR GARDEN, CONGRESS NAGAR, NAGPUR-

440 012,MAHARASHTRA.

DR. SWARNIM JAYKUMAR DIXIT

PRESENT ADDRESS - MEDICAL PRACTITIONER, R/O. 101/102, NANDINI GARDEN

APARTMENTS INFRONT OF CONGRESS NAGAR GARDEN, CONGRESS NAGAR, NAGPUR-

440 012,MAHARASHTRA.

DR. SMT. PUNAM SWARNAKUMAR DIXIT

PRESENT ADDRESS - MEDICAL PRACTITIONER R/O. 101/102, NANDINI GARDEN

APARTMENTS INFRONT OF CONGRESS NAGAR GARDEN, CONGRESS NAGAR, NAGPUR-

440 012,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Respondent(s)

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/CB2/27/A/124/2019

DR. JAYKUMAR S/O ASHWINKUMAR DIXIT

PRESENT ADDRESS - OCCUPATION MEDICAL PRACTITIONER R/O. 101-102, NANDINI

GARDEN APARTMENTS, BEFORE CONGRESS NAGAR GARDEN, CONGRESS NAGAR,

NAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

DR. SWARNIM S/O JAYKUMAR DIXIT

PRESENT ADDRESS - OCCUPATION MEDICAL PRACTITIONER R/O. 101-102, NANDINI

GARDEN APARTMENTS, BEFORE CONGRESS NAGAR GARDEN, CONGRESS NAGAR,

NAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

DR. SMT. PUNAM SWARNIM DIXIT

PRESENT ADDRESS - OCCUPATION MEDICAL PRACTITIONER R/O. 101-102, NANDINI

GARDEN APARTMENTS, BEFORE CONGRESS NAGAR GARDEN, CONGRESS NAGAR,

NAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus

MANOHAR BAPURAO KHORGADE

PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O. FLAT NO. A/10/5, NSK SOCIETY, RAVINAGAR, CIVIL LINES,

NAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

##PAGE2##

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. KALYANI KAPSE , PRESIDING MEMBER

HON'BLE MS. SHAILA D. WANDHARE , MEMBER

FOR THE APPELLANT:

ADV. RADKE FOR THE COMPLAINANT.

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

ADV. DESHPANDE FOR THE O.P. NOS. 1 TO 3

DATED: 30/01/2026

ORDER

COMMON ORDER

(Delivered on 30/01/2026)

PER MS. S.D. WANDHARE , HON’BLE MEMBER.

01. The Appeal (FA No.18/516) preferred by Manohar Bapurao

Khorgade (original complainant) and another appeal (FA No.19/124)

preferred by Dr.Jaykumar Dixit, Dr.Swarnim Jaykumar Dixit and

Dr.Punam Swarnimkumar Dixit (original O.P.Nos.1 to 3) being aggrieved

by the order passed on 24/10/2018 of the learned Additional District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nagpur (for short as “learned

District Forum”) in Consumer Complaint No.RBT/CC/18/250, vide Section

15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

02. The parties of both the appeals are hereinafter referred to their

original nomenclature as complainant and opposite parties respectively

for better appreciation.

03. The facts emerge from these appeals are that the complainant is

a retired government employee residing at Nagpur and has been

##PAGE3##

suffering from diabetes since the year 2010. It is alleged that the

complainant was induced by a newspaper advertisement issued by

Opposite Party (O.P.) No.1, a B.A.M.S. practitioner, wherein it was

claimed that diabetes could be permanently cured by ear acupuncture

without use of medicines or insulin. It was also represented that the said

treatment was unique, painless and effective and the treatment was

conducted at the diabetes clinic at Nagpur with the assistance of O.P.

Nos.2 and 3. The complainant approached O.P. No.1 on 22/02/2010,

relying upon such representations and agreed to undergo the said

treatment. The complainant paid an initial amount and thereafter paid

amounts from time to time towards treatment, which in total came to

about 46,000/-, mostly in cash, without issuance of proper receipts. The

complainant underwent treatment for a prolonged period and strictly

followed the instructions given by the opposite parties. The complainant

also regularly underwent blood sugar tests during the course of

treatment. However, despite continuous treatment, the blood sugar levels

of the complainant did not reduce. On the contrary, the blood sugar levels

gradually increased. The condition of the complainant deteriorated over

the time. The complainant suffered serious health complications including

adve

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 Back to top