Petitioner was the opposite party before the State Commission.

          During the pendency of the complaint, petitioner moved an application for referring the medical and treatment papers of late Sh.Gaurav Khanna to a competent Doctor or a Committee of Doctors having specialization in the field of cardiac surgery for opinion or in alternative with a prayer thereby to obtain necessary opinion in this

-2-

regard.  State Commission has dismissed the said application, aggrieved against which the petitioner has filed this revision petition.

          In view of a recent judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in “MARTIN F. D’SOUZA VS. MOHD. ISHFAQ, I (2009) CPJ 32 (SC)       has held that in the case of ‘Medical Negligence’, it is necessary to obtain opinion of an expert.  The State Commission, in our view, has erred in not referring the dispute to obtain the expert opinion, especially when the case was pending at the first stage before it.  No expert evidence had been led by either of the parties. 

          For the reasons stated above, we set aside the order of the State Commission and direct the parties through their counsel to appear before the State Commission on the date already fixed, i.e. 09.11.2009.

          State Commission is directed to send the medical and treatment papers to the Deen Calcutta Medical College and Hospital with a request to constitute a Committee of Experts in the respective discipline involved for getting the expert opinion.  The State Commission may also request the Deen Calcutta Medical College

-3-

and Hospital to send the opinion within two months of receipt of the request.

          Since it is an old case, we would request the State Commission to dispose of original complaint within six months of the first date of appearance.

          Revision petition stands disposed of in above terms.

          Dasti.