Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MR. R.K. AGRAWAL, CJ, MRS. M. SHREESHA, J
SMT KAMALABAI VISHNU KHODSE & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
DR. YESHWANT B. KHAOSLE & ANR. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction and procedural background (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of plaintiff's case and medical history (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. opposition's argument and defenses (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. district forum's findings of medical negligence (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. state commission's observations on evidence (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. interpretation of expert evidence (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. final viewpoint on medical negligence (Para 16 , 17) |
| 8. final analysis of medical treatment adequacy (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 9. court's decision and justification for compensation (Para 21 , 22) |
| 10. conclusion regarding awarded compensation (Para 23) |
ORDER
Challenge in these two Revision Petitions filed by the Petitioners/Complainants, under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 (for short “the Act”), is to the order dated 09.01.2015 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench at Aurangabad (for short “the State Commission”) in Appeal Nos. 163 & 186 of 2010. By the impugned order, the State Commission has reversed the order dated 23.11.2009, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Beed (for short “the District Forum”) in Consumer Complaint No. 200
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
