In this case SC included medical negligence and medical profession within the scope of consumer protection act .Consequently empowering the aggreieved due to medical negligence to sue for damages for deficiency in services by a medical professional or medical institution , in a civil court .
Issue –Whether professional services are to be considered under the Consumer protection Act.
Judgement –The court said act was made for the benefit of consumer so the term service needs to be construed keeping the consumer in minds. On perusal of section 2(1)(o) if the act, the court stated that the definition of service was divided into three parts, namely, the main part, the inclusionary part and the exclusionary part. The court stated that the scope of main part in itself was extremely wide while placing reliance on another judgement, namely, Lucknow Development Authority vs. M.K Gupta, where the court had used the definition of “any” established in Black Law’s dictionary to establish that it meant “all” or “some” or even “one”. The court in that judgement stated that the main part gave the widest scope to the definition of service with inclusive part adding to the list but not exhausting it. Thus empowering the aggrieved due to medical negligence to sue for damages for deficiency in services by a medical professional or medical institution , in a civil court .
Jurisdictio Omnis 