BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD

C.C.NO.96 OF 2010

Between:

Shri Ashok Kumar Mishra

Age 61 yrs, H.No.368 Dwaraka Nagar
Baroda, Dist. Betul, Madhya Pradesh-001                              

1.  The Apollo Hospital
Jubilee Hills
Hyderabad-033
A.P.

2.  Dr.K.Shrat Chandra
Occ: Cardiologist
Age Major, The Apollo Hospitals
Jubilee Hills, Hyd-AP

3.  Dr.T.Rajendra Prasad,

Age Major, Occ: Cardio Thoracic Surgeon

The Apollo Hospitals
Jubilee Hills, Hyd-AP

4.  Dr.P.C.Rath
Occ: Cardiologist, age Major
The Apollo Hospitals
Jubilee Hills, Hyd-AP

5.  Dr.Vijay Dixit
Occ: Cardio Thoracic Surgeon
The Apollo Hospitals
Jubilee Hills, Hyd-AP

       Counsel for the Appellant        

Counsel for the Respondent    

         QUORUM:  

                       SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HON’BLE MEMBER

WEDNESDAY THE THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER

Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Hon’ble Member)

1.            `43,24,899/- under various heads such as medical expenses, future expenses for angioplasty and compensation etc.,

2.              

3.            

4.              

5.             

6.             

7.            

8.            th

9.             

10.           

11.           

12.            

13.             

14.    

15.           

16.            

17.           

18.           

i)            Whether the complaint is filed within the period of limitation?

ii)          Whether the opposite parties rendered deficient service?

iii)         To what relief?

19.            

20.            

21.    

22.    

23.            

“Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is peremptory in nature and requires consumer forum to see before it admits the complaint that it has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action. The consumer forum, however, for the reasons to be recorded in writing may condone the delay in filing the complaint if sufficient cause is shown. The expression, `shall not admit a complaint' occurring in section 24A is sort of a legislative command to the consumer forum to examine on its own whether the complaint has been filed within limitation period prescribed thereunder. As a matter of law, the consumer forum must deal with the complaint on merits only if the complaint has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action and if beyond the said period, the sufficient cause has been shown and delay condoned for the reasons recorded in writing. It is the duty of the consumer forum to take notice of section 24A and give effect to it. If the complaint is barred by time and yet, the consumer forum decides the complaint on merits, the forum would be committing an illegality and, therefore, the aggrieved party would be entitled to have such order set aside”. (emphasis supplied)

24.           V.N.Shrikhande (Dr.) v. Anita Sena Fernandes, VII (2010) CPJ 27”the    

18. In cases of medical negligence, no straitjacket formula can be applied for determining as to when the cause of action has accrued to the consumer. Each case is to be decided on its own facts. If the effect of negligence on the doctor’s part or any person associated with him is patent, the cause of action will be deemed to have arisen on the date when the act of negligence was done. If, on the other hand, the effect of negligence is latent, then the cause of action will arise on the date when the patient or his representative-complainant discovers the harm/injury caused due to such act or the date when the patient or his representative-complainant could have, by exercise of reasonable diligence discovered the act constituting negligence.

25.           

26.           

27.           

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   KMK*