Per Mr.S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

          This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 28/07/1999 dismissing the consumer complaint passed in consumer complaint no.270/1998, Mst.Mohammed Juned Mohammed Yakub, minor through its natural guardian and father Mohd. Yakub v/s. Dr.Avinash H.Patil and another, by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Akola (‘forum’ in short).  Deficiency in service on the part of respondent/opponent no.1-Dr.Patil (herein after referred as Dr.Patil) is made in respect of the treatment given to the complainant Mohd.Juned Mohd.Yakub while treating his hand fracture.  The forum found that no deficiency in service vis-à-vis medical negligence is established against opponent Dr.Patil and dismissed the consumer complaint. Feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal is preferred by the original complainant.

          Heard the respondent in person. Nobody remain present on behalf of the appellant. Even though it is an alleged medical negligence case and since to the facts of the present case Doctrine of Res ispa locator is not applicable, it is for the complainant to establish his own case.  From the material placed before it, forum observed that Dr.Patil treated the complainant only on three occasions as an outdoor patient.  According to complainant it is Dr.Belmere, who is an Orthopedic surgeon at Amravati subsequently opined that Dr.Patil negligently given him treatment, but there is no evidence led on behalf of the complainant to substantiate the same.  There is hardly any evidence led on behalf of the complainant to show that Dr.Patil treated the complainant negligently or any negligence was shown while treating the complainant.  Therefore, applying the Bolam’ test, it cannot be said that Dr.Patil showed any medical negligence vis-à-vis deficiency in service within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  Thus, dismissal of the consumer complaint cannot be faulted with.  We hold accordingly and pass the following order:-

                                      ORDER

Appeal stands dismissed.

No order as to costs.

Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.

Pronounced on 9^th December, 2011.