For the Appellant   (s)       :     Ch. Srinivas Chakravarthy, Advocate with

                                              Appellant in person   

For the Respondent(s)       :     Mr. Ishan Sanghi, Advocate   

Dated : 17.09.2024

ORDER ORAL)

          Heard Learned Counsel for both the parties.

          Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the only grievance of the Appellant/Complainant is that during the course of pleadings, she had submitted to the learned State Commission that Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy is not the doctor who performed surgery on her, and that it was correctly recorded.  At the same time, she never stated that the said Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy was nowhere connected with the medical negligence in her case.  She states that the said Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy is liable for the treatment performed on her and negligence thereto. 

-2-

          As per Learned Counsel for the Appellant, at para 8 of the order of the State Commission dated 15.05.2024 in EA IA No.867 of 2024 in EA No.14 of 2024 in Consumer Complaint No.50 of 2010, this aspect was erroneously recorded.  As the Review Application with respect to the same filed by the Appellant was dismissed, with mere minor corrections vide order dated 20.06.2024, this RP has been filed.

          Learned Counsel for the Respondent has no objection to the submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner.  However, he states that this issue was not brought out in the Complaint and this is new contention that has been made in the stage of execution.

          Considering the submissions made, the learned State Commission is requested to consider the present submissions as clarified by the Appellant before this Commission in the subsequent proceedings and disposal.

          With these directions, AE No.57 of 2024 is disposed of.

          All pending Applications, if any, are also disposed of accordingly.