Rishi Vs. Pushpa

Rishi vs Pushpa

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi Decided Mar 28, 2005

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1112458

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1112458
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Judge: J.D. Kapoor, President; Mr. Mahesh Chandra Member &Amp; Ms. Rumnita Mittal, Member
Decided On: Mar 28, 2005
Case Number: Revision Petition No. 338 of 1998
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(g) - Comparative Citation: 2005 (3) CPJ 193

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rishi

Respondent

Pushpa

Excerpt

consumer protection act, 1986 - section 2(1)(g) - comparative citation: 2005 (3) cpj 193j.d. kapoor, president: 1. the complainant on account of deficiency in service claimed compensation of rs. 5,00,000/- on account of medical negligence on the part of the respondent inasmuch as that during the termination of pregnancy, her uterus was removed and also small intestine was cut. it was dismissed merely on the ground that the case of criminal negligence has been registered against the respondent and the matter is pending trial under ipc before the criminal court. 2. we have taken a view that proceedings for criminal negligence are independent proceedings. proceedings under the consumer protection act, 1986 are on account of deficiency in service or medical negligence. criminal negligence is distinguishable from âdeficiency in service as defined under section 2(1)(g) of the consumer protection act, 1986. criminal negligence involves element of rashness. it is a penal offence and attracts sentence of imprisonment and fine. on the other hand deficiency as defined under section 2(1)(g) of the act, means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service. it is on account of loss, injury suffered by the consumer that a consumer is entitled for a compensation. in view of the aforesaid reasons, the petition is allowed, impugned order is set aside. complaint is sent back to the district forum with directions to decide the complaint on merits. the parties shall appear before the concerned district forum for the aforesaid purpose on 2.5.2005. 3. a copy of this order, as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties, free of charge and also to the concerned district forum and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. r.p. allowed.

Full Judgment

J.D. Kapoor, President:

1. The complainant on account of deficiency in service claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of medical negligence on the part of the respondent inasmuch as that during the termination of pregnancy, her uterus was removed and also small intestine was cut. It was dismissed merely on the ground that the case of criminal negligence has been registered against the respondent and the matter is pending trial under IPC before the Criminal Court.

2. We have taken a view that proceedings for criminal negligence are independent proceedings. Proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are on account of deficiency in service or medical negligence. Criminal negligence is distinguishable from âdeficiency in service as defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Criminal negligence involves element of rashness. It is a penal offence and attracts sentence of imprisonment and fine. On the other hand deficiency as defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Act, means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service. It is on account of loss, injury suffered by the consumer that a consumer is entitled for a compensation. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the petition is allowed, impugned order is set aside. Complaint is sent back to the District Forum with directions to decide the complaint on merits. The parties shall appear before the concerned District Forum for the aforesaid purpose on 2.5.2005.

3. A copy of this order, as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties, free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to the Record Room.

R.P. allowed.

Same Court & Year Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New ... Same Parties Rishi vs Pushpa Same Subject Miscellaneous Same Judge J.D. Kapoor, President; Mr. Mahesh Chandra Member &Amp; Ms. R...

Miscellaneous