ORDER

Date of order:     24 -05-2017

Upendra Jha,Member       

                   This appeal is directed against the order dated 25-06-2014 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Madhepura in Complaint Case No. 29 of 2010 by which the appellant is directed to pay the respondent Rs.  3,00,000/-(Rupees three lacs only) within 15 days failing which 6.5% interest will be payable.

2.                Briefly stated, the case is that the wife of the complainant-respondent Zarina Khatoon consulted the O.P.-appellant Doctor regarding pain in abdomen and bleeding.  After checkup, she was operated on 25-06-2010 and she was referred to Dr. N. Pd. of Patna on 29-06-2010. The patient was admitted in Rajeshwar Hospital, Patna on 30-06-2010 and on 05-07-2010. She was discharged from there. Then, she was admitted in P.M.C.H. on 05-07-2010 unfortunately, she died on 06-07-2010 in PMCH. A Complaint Case was filed before the District Forum, Madhepura against the O.P.-Doctor for direction to the O.P.-appellant to pay the complainant a compensation of Rs. 4, 00,000/-(Rupees four lacs only). The O.P. - Doctor appeared and contested the case. The District Forum passed the impugned order, against which this appeal is preferred.

3.                           Respective written notes of arguments have been filed by the parties. Heard and perused the District Forum order.

4.                           The District Forum finding negligence in the treatment of patient has allowed the claim and passed the impugned order.

5.                           The counsel for the appellant-Doctor submits that Opposite-party belongs to Saharsa. All cause of action held in Saharsa but the complaint was filed in the District Forum, Madhepura which is not maintainable.District Forum, Madhepura has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Secondly no expert report has been obtained by the District Forum to substantiate the allegations.  No evidences under section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been adduced. Hence, the order under appeal is not sustainable. It is fit to be set aside and the appeal be allowed.

6.                           The counsel for the O.P.-respondent submits that the District Forum has considered the case in correct perspective and has passed the  order which is correct and justified. It needs no interference.

 7.                            Having considered the submission of parties and on perusal of the order passed by the District Forum, it appears that the District Forum has not considered the matter in correct perspective.  District Forum, Madhepura has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the case of Saharsa District. All cause of action held in Saharsa.O.P.-Doctor belongs to Saharsa. Hence, the complaint was not entertainable in Madhepura. We do not find any expert report to establish the case. There is no sufficient evidence. For the reasons stated above, the District Forum order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

       S.K.Sinha                         Renu Sinha                  Upendra Jha                                                                      

      President                           Member (F)                   Member (M)

           Anita