HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT

1.           This revisional application is at the instance of the Revisionists / Opposite Parties and is directed against the order dated 22/06/2022 passed by the Addl. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat in connection with Miscellaneous Application No. 76/2022 arising out of Consumer Complaint Case No. CC/16/2022 thereby allowing the application dated 26/05/2022 in part filed by the Revisionists / Petitioners.

2.           The brief fact of the case is that the Respondents / Complainants filed a complaint case under section 35 read with section 2(6) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying for the following reliefs :-

“Hence it is prayed that in view of the foregoing facts and circumstances necessary order may kindly be made against the Opposite Parties to refund the medical bill of Rs. 8,64,030.13/- and pay the compensation amount of Rs.3,00,00,000.00/- for all the harassment, trauma and mental agony that the family has suffered and provide a high degree of security to the bereaved family and litigation cost of Rs.50,000/- against, and to pass such further order or orders as Your Honour may deem fit and proper.”

3.           The Revisionists / Petitioners entered appearance in this case and have been contesting the instant case. The Revisionists / Petitioners filed an application on 26/05/2022 praying for expunging their names. Learned District Commission was pleased to allow the said application dated 26/05/2022 in part and the names of Opposite Parties No. 3,5,6 & 7 were expunged from the cause title of the complaint and the prayer for expunging the names of the Opposite Parties No. 8,9,10,11 & 12 were not considered by the impugned order.

4.           Being aggrieved, the Revisionists / Opposite Parties have preferred this revisional application.

5.           Now, the question is whether the impugned order should be sustained.

6.           Learned Advocate appearing for the Revisionists / Petitioners has submitted that the order dated 22/06/2022 passed by the Learned Addl. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat is bad in law and should be set aside. He has further submitted that no reliance has been provided to make out and distinguish as to why the application of the Revisionists / Opposite Parties No. 2,4,8 to 12 could not be allowed but the application of the Revisionists / Opposite Parties No. 3,5,6 & 7 has been allowed. He has further submitted that Learned Addl. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat erred in coming to the conclusion that the rules of evidence recognizes that the treating Doctors may adduce evidences as a witness of fact. He has further submitted that Learned Addl. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat has erroneously considered the case solely from the view of the Complainant and ought to have considered the fact totally. He has further submitted that Learned Addl. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat did not appreciate the actual position as set out in the expunge application and erroneously proceeded to pass the impugned order. So, the impugned order should be set aside and the application dated 26/05/2022 should be allowed.

7.           Upon hearing the Learned Advocate appearing for the Revisionists / Petitioners and on perusal of the record and the expunging application dated 26/05/2022, it appears to us that Complainants / Respondents filed a complaint case being No. CC/16/2022 against the Revisionists / Petitioners praying for refund of medical bill amounting to Rs.8,64,030.13/- and further praying to pay compensation for a sum of Rs. 3,00,00,000.00/- for the harassment, trauma, mental agony suffered by the Complainants.

8.           It appears to us that the Revisionists / Petitioners entered appearance in this case and filed an application for expunging their names from the cause title of the Petition of complaint on 26/05/2022. The Opposite Party No. 1 hospital being juristic person needs to be represented by living persons i.e. the Revisionist No. 2 who is the Director of the said Hospital, the Respondent No. 4 who is  the Chief Financial Officer of Tata Medical Centre and the Revisionist No. 8,9,10,11 & 12 who are treating Doctors cum Consultants of the said Hospital. The patient’s duty of care starts from time of admission. The responsibility of care is on treating doctors and hospital till the patient’s discharge from the Hospital. Therefore, we hold that the presence of the said Revisionist No. 2,4,8,9,10,11 & 12 is necessary for the determination of the real matter in dispute as well as for effective and proper adjudication of the complaint case. Therefore, we find that there is no illegality and / or irregularity in the order passed by the Learned Addl. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat. So, the impugned order passed by the Learned District Commission is within the jurisdiction which is not bad in law. There is no scope to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the revisional application is dismissed in limini.

9.           Considering the facts and circumstances, there will be no orders as to costs.

10.           The District Commission is directed to proceed with the complaint case and decide the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order of this Commission.

11.           Let a copy of this order be sent down to the Learned District Commission at once.