The Supreme Court of India is set to examine a legal question with "wide ramifications" for the consumer justice system: Can the legal heirs of a person—such as a doctor—be held liable to pay compensation for negligence committed by that person during their lifetime?
A bench comprising Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar is currently hearing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) that highlights a significant gap in the transition between the old Consumer Protection Act of 1986 and the new Consumer Protection Act of 2019. The central issue is whether a consumer complaint survives the death of the accused professional and whether their "estate" (the property left behind) can be used to satisfy a compensation claim through their legal heirs.
The case, titled Kumud Lall v. Suresh Chandra Roy (Dead) Through LRs & Ors., originated from a complaint of medical negligence filed by a consumer against a doctor. The journey of this case through various judicial levels illustrates the hurdles faced by litigants in India:
- District Forum: The consumer initially won the case at the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, which found the doctor negligent and awarded compensation.
- State Commission: The doctor appealed this decision, and the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission set aside the District Forum’s order, ruling in favor of the doctor.
- National Commission (NCDRC): The consumer then moved the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in a revision petition.
- The Turning Point: While the matter was pending before the NCDRC, the doctor passed away. Shortly thereafter, the consumer who filed the complaint also died.
With both the original complainant and the accused doctor deceased, the legal heirs of the consumer approached the Supreme Court to determine if the fight for justice could continue against the doctor’s legal heirs.
