Karnataka

StateCommission

RP/115/2018

The Apollo Pharmacy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt.Nagamma - Opp.Party(s)

K.B.K.Swamy

16 Jun 2023

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
Revision Petition No. RP/115/2018
( Date of Filing : 24 Apr 2018 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 27/09/2017 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/160/2016 of District Mandya)
 
1. The Apollo Pharmacy
Rep. by its Executive, V.V.Road, Mandya City
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Smt.Nagamma
W/o Channappa, Aged about 50 years, R/a No.62, 4th Cross, Swarnasandra, Mandya City
2. Nagendra.C
S/o Chinnappa, Aged about 30 years, R/a No.62, 4th cross, Swarnasandra, Mandya City
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar JUDICIAL MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 16 Jun 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Date:16.06.2023

O R D E R

         BY Mr.K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : Pri.Dist & Session Judge (R) - JUDICIAL MEMBER.

 

  1.    This is a petition filed U/s.17(b) of CPA 1986 by the Petitioner/OP in CC/160/2016 on the file of Mandya District Commission, aggrieved by the order dtd.27.09.2017.  
  2.  The Commission examined grounds of revision, impugned order and revision papers.
  3. Learned counsel for Revision Petitioner submits to discard the evidence of expert witness Dr.Janardhan and to set aside the order dtd.27.09.2017 to that effect. It is found from the impugned order that the Forum below recorded reasons that issuance of notice to learned counsel for OP by Learned Commissioner was served and in such circumstances, question of discarding evidence of expert witness Dr.Janardhan, only for his non participation, does not survive for consideration, but facts remain that the case alleged being medical negligence, forum below could have given an opportunity  to rebut  evidence of Dr.Janardhan, permitting counsel for OP/Appellant herein to cross examine before the very said Commissioner at the  cost of revision petitioner herein and by imposing cost to be payable to the complainant.  In such view of the matter, since learned Counsel submits that the complaint case is still pending determination, as such, we found satisfied to interfere in the impugned order to revive which would have meet the end of justice.
  4. In the above such conclusion, this revision stands disposed of with direction to the Forum below to permit OP/Revision Petitioner to cross examine the evidence of expert witness Dr.Janardhan at their cost. Accordingly, directed the Forum below to fix the cost to be payable by Revision Petitioner herein and fix the commission fee to be payable to the Ld. Commissioner. It is hereby direct the commission below to fix the date of recording cross examination of witness by Revision Petitioner which would be convenient to both parties and decide the complaint case as early as possible not later than three months from the date of receipt of the order.

 

  1. Notify copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties.

 

 

 Lady Member                              Judicial Member                         

 

*NS*     

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar]
JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.