ORDER NO. 3 DT. 21.6.11

HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. P.K.SAMANTA, PRESIDENT

Revisionist through Mr. A.K.Sil and OP No. 1 through Mr. B.Prasad, Ld. Advocates, are present.  Heard both sides.  Judgement is delivered as under:-

This Revisional Application is directed against the order dt. 12.1.11 passed by Calcutta District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit-I, in CDF/Case No. 415 of 2007 whereby the petition filed by the OP No. 1 for production of the documents such as medical treatment papers of the complainant along with the Bedhead Tickets by the Superintendent, B.M.Birla Heart Research Centre, in which the complainant was examined and treated by the said OP No. 1, as well as his petition for amendment of the written statement, were rejected.

Upon careful consideration of the complaint case as well as the defence taken by the OP No. 1, more particularly, considering the amendment as sought for by the OP No. 1, we are of the view that such amendments would not in any way change the nature and character of the defence already taken by the OP No. 1, nor there was any contrary stand to the defence already taken in the original written version.    We accordingly hold that the Forum below has acted illegally and with material irregularity in its exercise of jurisdiction by rejecting the amendment petition.  However, it is made clear that if on the basis of such amendment if any further evidence is led by the OP No. 1, in such event, if the Forum below is of the opinion that the complainant should be given an opportunity to lead further evidence in support of his complaint, then such opportunity should be given to him.

On the question whether the Superintendent, B.M.Birla Heart Reseach Centre should be directed to produce the documents relating to treatment papers comprising Bedhead Tickets of the complainant, the case being of medical negligence and considering the fact that the complainant was treated in the said hospital by the OP No. 1 some time in the month of July, 2004, i.e. almost 7 years before, we are of the view that it is absolutely necessary to pass such direction for production of the medical treatment papers of the complainant by the said hospital for the purpose of proper and effective adjudication of the complaint of medical negligence against the OP No. 1.  We are, therefore, of the opinion that the said order of rejection also suffers from illegality and material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction.  The impugned order is thus set aside.  The Revisional Application is accordingly disposed of in the manner as above.