West Bengal

StateCommission

RP/25/2017

The Nilratan Sircar Medical College and Hospital - Complainant(s)

Versus

Fatema Bibi - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Indranil Biswas

13 Dec 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
Revision Petition No. RP/25/2017
(Arisen out of Order Dated 23/09/2016 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/307/2016 of District Kolkata-II(Central))
 
1. The Nilratan Sircar Medical College and Hospital
138, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & P.S. - Entally, Kolkata -700 014.
2. The Principal, The Nilratan Sircar Medical College and Hospital
138, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & P.S. - Entally, Kolkata -700 014.
3. The Medical Superintendent cum Vice Principal, , Nil Ratan Sircar Medical College & Hospital
138, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & P.S. - Entally, Kolkata -700 014.
4. Dr. S. Purakayastha, Gynae & obstatics Dept.,, The Nilratan Sircar Medical College and Hospital
138, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & P.S. - Entally, Kolkata -700 014.
5. The West Bengal Medical Council
GA-29, Sector-V, Salt Lake City, P.S.- Electronic Complex, Kolkata -700 091.
6. The Secretary to the Govt. of W.B, Dept. Health & Family Welfare
G.A. Branch, Swasthya Bhawan, GA-29, Sector-V, Salt Lake City, P.S.- Electronic Complex, Kolkata -700 091.
7. The Director, Directorate, Health & Family Welfare, Dept. Health & Family Welfare
Govt. of W.B., Swasthya Bhawan, GA-29, Sector-V, Salt Lake City, P.S.- Electronic Complex, Kolkata -700 091.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Fatema Bibi
W/o Md. Ruhul Amin Molla, Vill. - Nimkuriya, P.O. - Joypur, P.S.- Kashipur, Dist.- South 24 Pgs., Pin- 743 502.
2. Dr. A. Nister, Ballygunge Maternity & Nursing Home
20/1/1M, Ballygunge Road, P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata -700 019.
3. Dr. Prosenjit Sarkar
24, Bepin Pal Road, P.S. - Tollygunge, Kolkata- 700 026.
4. The Microlap Nursing Home
24, Bepin Pal Road, P.S. - Tollygunge, Kolkata- 700 026.
5. Dr. Sankar Nath Mitra, Gynae & Obstatics Dept. The Nilratan Sircar Medical College & Hospital
Vidyasagar Road, P.O.- Midnapore, P.S. Midnapore Town Kotwali, Dist. Paschim Medinipur, Pin-721 101.
6. Dr. P.K. Sen
306, Prince Anwar Shah Road, P.S. - Lake, Kolkata - 700 045.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY MEMBER
 
For the Petitioner:Mr. Indranil Biswas, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Pinka Ghosh, Ms. Olivia Mukherjee, Advocate
 Mr. Abhishek Mondal, Advocate
 Mr. Soumen Mondal, Advocate
Dated : 13 Dec 2017
Final Order / Judgement

 

HON’BLE JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS, PRESIDENT

       The Revisional Application has been filed by the OP of CC/307/2016, questioning the propriety of the order no. 7 dated 23-09-2016 passed in CC/307/2016 by Ld. DCDRF, Kolkata, Unit-II. In the order impugned Ld. DCDRF concerned passed two fold orders of rejection, one is the rejection of a prayer of the complainant, praying for rejection of the written version filed by the OPs no. 1 to 3 i.e. the revisionists herein and the other is the rejection of the prayer for further time to file written version by the other OPs. In the 1st part of the order Ld. Forum concerned rejected the prayer of the complainant with cost of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) for rejecting the written version of OPs no. 1 to 3 on the ground that no such written version was filed on their behalf till date (i.e. 23-09-2016). Since no written version was available on record the question of rejecting the same did not rise and Ld. Trial Forum rightly passed that part of the order impugned with cost of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand).

       So far as the later part of the order of rejection of is concerned the Trial Forum did not allow time to the OPs to contest the complaint case by filing written version on their behalf on a future date. Since Ld. Trial Forum rejected their prayer on the ground that the statutory period for filing written version was over in the mean time. When the Forum concerned did not feel it necessary to allow further time to file written version after the statutory period it cannot be said that the order passed by Ld. Trial Forum is not supported by law or there was any other material irregularity or illegality. Regard being have to the facts of the case, we find nothing illegality in the order impugned and we feel it proper to uphold the same. With the above observation the Revisional Application stands disposed of. Parties do bear their respective costs of this proceeding. 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.