Date of filing: 19.6.2017 Date of disposal: 05.7.2017
Complainant: Bablu Halder, S/o. Mohan Halder, resident of Dhatrigram, Barasarajpur, PO: Dhatrigram, PS; Kalna, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 005.
Opposite Party: 1. Dr. Dilip Chowdhury, having his chamber at Nabadwip Nursing Home, Dearapara, Nabadwip, Dist: Nadia, PIN – 741 302.
2. Nabadwip Nursing Home, represented by its Director, having its office at Dearapara, Nabadwip, Dist: Nadia, PIN – 741 302.
Proforma Opposite Party: 3. Dr. S. A. Samad, having his chamber at Suraha Nursing Home, Kalna, Bardhaman, PIN – 713 409.
Present: Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.
Hon’ble Member: Sri Pankaj Kumar Sinha.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate,Suvro Chakraborty.
Appeared for the Opposite Party No. 1&2: Ld. Advocate, Deb Krishna Sinha.
Order No. 17, Dated: 05.7.2017
This order is arising out of the M. A. Case being No. 103/2017 filed by the complainant in the C. C. No. 116/2016 praying for incorporation of the name and address of Dr. Bhaskar Ghosal is a necessary party in the instant proceeding.
In the application it is mentioned by the complainant that the instant complaint has been filed by him alleging medical negligence against the Ops. Originally this complaint was filed against the OP-1&2 i.e. Dr. Dilip Chowdhury and Nabadwip Nursing Home. By making appearance in the instant case the OP-1&2 has filed their written version with some false and self-made story. In the paragraph no. 15 of the written version the OP-1&2 have declared that Dr. Bhaskar Ghosal is a necessary party in the instant complaint as he provided the treatment to the complainant actually. Therefore, for proper disposal of the case and abundant precaution Dr. Bhaskar Ghosal should be incorporated as an Opposite Party. The address of Dr. Ghosal has been mentioned in the schedule below. According to the complainant until and unless this prayer is allowed by the ld. Forum he will suffer irreparable loss and injury and prayer is made for allowing the application.
Though the copy has duly been received by the OP-1&2 but during hearing of the M.A. none is present before this ld. Forum. To avoid delay we take up the hearing.
It is seen from the paragraph no. 15 of the written version of the OP-1&2 that admittedly the name of Dr. Bhaskar Ghosal has been mentioned by the OP-1&2 stating that Dr. Ghosal had provided actual treatment to the complainant. But it is also evident from the cause title of the complaint that Dr. Bhaskar Ghosal has not been made a party in this proceeding. Therefore, until and unless Dr. Ghosal has been made necessary party in this proceeding, the complaint cannot be adjudicated upon properly. Therefore, in our view the prayer of the complainant is considered and the same should be allowed. Hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the Misc. Application Case being No. 103/2017 is hereby allowed on contest without any cost.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of law.
Dictated and corrected by me.
(Pankaj Kumar Sinha)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder) (Pankaj Kumar Sinha)
Member Member
DCDRF, Burdwan DCDRF, Burdwan
