HON’BLE JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS,PRESIDENT

          This Appeal has been directed against the Judgement and order dated 7.8.2017 passed by ld. D.C.D.R.F, Kolkata Unit III (South) in CC 416 of 2017 where ld. Forum concerned which at the initial stage declined to admit the Complaint case and dismissed the same.

          Being aggrieved by such Order of dismissal , the present Appeal has been preferred by the Complainant. 

          The case of the Complainant was that he suffered from low flow of urine for one year but without any pain and  for such obstruction, requested the Doctor to prescribe appropriate medicine for the treatment of such mild flow of urine and further asked for advice of pathological tests. The treating Doctor of the O.P./Fortis Hospital and Kidney Institute did not pay heed to such request but directed for blood examination and other costly pathological tests which was not necessary for the treatment of the Complainant and  he prescribed medicines which ultimately became harmful to him and the Doctor was compelled to stop it on a complaint of the complainant, immediately after use of such medicine. The Doctor of the OP concerned did not prescribe any other medicine for the treatment of the patient , rather avoided his obligation and  referred to some other Doctor. The Complainant alleged that the hospital Authority was fully responsible for not giving proper treatment to the Complainant/patient which amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, only for earning profit without proper attention to serve the patient who was  relying them in good faith. Since no relief was given to the Complainant despite the fact that he had to suffer and paid the requisite fees and to bear all the costs of pathological tests, that  compelled him to take recourse of the D.C.D.R.F. concerned, claiming exemplary costs and compensation as per provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 , refund of costs of unnecessary tests and other consequential reliefs.

          Ld. Trial Forum in the impugned order did not admit the Petition of Complaint with the observations that the Complainant failed to make out any case of deficiency in service  and unfair trade practice  etc. Since the Complainant produced certain documents in support of his case before us, we are of considered opinion, that he should be given an opportunity to ventilate his grievance before the Trial forum in presence of the Opposite party and ld. Trial Forum was not proper in dismissing the Petition of complaint instead of admitting it. Hence we set aside the order impugned and direct the ld. Trial Forum to admit the Petition of Complaint of C.C. 416 of 2017  and to dispose of the claim of the Complainant on merit,  taking recourse of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

          With these observations and directions this Appeal is disposed of. We do not pass any order as to costs. To 3.10.2018 for appearance before Ld. D.C.D.R.F