This appeal is directed against the judgement and final order dated 15.09.2017 of Ld. DCDRF, Cooch Behar in CC. No. 61 of 2014.

The case is short is that the appellant Tarun Chakraborty registered the consumer complaint U/S 12 of CP Act, 1986 on 11.09.2014 to the effect that he went to Dr. Amlan Bhadra (hereinafter referred as OP No.1) on 09.03.2012 due to falling down from his Motor Cycle at Cooch Behar. After examination, the OP No.1 advised him to undergo External fixation for proper union of both bones in his right leg and accordingly, he got himself admitted at Shila Nursing Home & Diagnostics (hereinafter referred as OP No.2) and paid a package of Rs.75,000/- which included the cost of surgery, post operative care as also other expenditure. The surgery was performed on 09.03.2012 by Dr. Amlan Bhadra at OP No.2 Nursing Home, but due to negligence of Ops, pus was developed in the right leg and Complainant started experiencing severe pain though debridement was done on 15.03.2012. In spite of that, the condition of his right leg did not improve. As there was possibility of gangrene and amputation of leg, the Complainant left the OP No.2 Nursing Home on 20.03.2012.

The Complainant rushed to Patna on 20.03.2012 for proper treatment and consulted Dr. J. Mukhopadhyay in the Popular Nursing Home at Patna and the Doctor had found the blood sugar level of the Complainant at 369. The Complainant was indoor patient of Popular Nursing home from 21.03.2012 to 24.03.2012 and left Patna for Kolkata without surgery because of paucity of fund. On 26.03.2012, the Complainant went to Bhattacharyya Orthopedic & Related Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. at Kolkata and consulted Dr. Sailendra Bhattacharyya who also found uncontrolled blood sugar and infected wound. The Complainant got himself admitted in the said Research Centre on 26.03.2012 and remained there up to 30.04.2012. The Complainant further got admitted in the said Research Centre on 10.05.2012 and he was discharged on 11.05.2012. On 12.03.13, the said Research Centre issued a report which revealed that right leg of the Complainant was short about 1". The Complainant was not fully recovered from the damage done to his right leg because of the first surgery by the OP No.1 at OP No.2 Nursing Home, which resulted 58% disability due to negligence of the Ops. The Op No.1 did not maintain professional ethics which tantamount to medical negligence and deficiency in service. The Complainant has claimed Rs. 1 lakh for medical negligence and deficiency in service, Rs.3,78,161/- as miscellaneous expenses for treatment of the Complainant, Rs.5 lakh for mental pain and agony and other reliefs.

The OP No.1 and 2 put their appearance through Ld. Agents. The Op No.1 filed w/v on 05.01.2015 inter-alia denying the material allegations of the Complainant contending that the Complaint case is not maintainable against the OP No.1 and it is bad for defect of parties. It is the version of the OP No.1 that one Tarun