District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No.532/21.

 Date of Institution: 12.10.2021.

Date of Order: 17.05.2023.

Mrs. Neelam Devi wife of Shri Bharat Pal, resident of Gali NO.2, Rajeev Colony, Samaypur Road, Ballabgarh, District Faridabad.

                                                                   …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

Advance Centre of Digestic & Level Diseases, D-33, Main Market, Near Police Station, Haus Haus, New Delhi through its Director/principal Officer.

                                                                   …Opposite party……

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana…………Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh.  Rajesh Gautam,  counsel for the complainant.

                             Opposite party ex-parte vide order dated 21.12.2022.

ORDER:  

                   The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant was having pain in her stomach n 12.1.2017, hence she went to Palwal Hospital, Sector-56, Faridabad, where she was medically examined by concerned doctor and

she was advised to get her MRCP, hence the complainant visited to Sarvodaya hospital B.K.Chowk, NH-5, NIT, Faridabad, where she was medically examined and her MRCP was conducted on 14.01.2017.  At that time the concerned doctor advised the complainant to get her ERCP and for which she was advised to go the opposite party.  Then the complainant visited the opposite party on 18.01.2017 , for her ERCP, where they conducted the  ERCP of the complainant on the same day, then the doctors of opposite party advised the complainant to get insert stunt.  The complainant believed their words and became ready for inseing stunt  and for which opposite party received Rs.14,500/- +  Rs.4000/- from the complainant and for which they issued separate bill. On 18.4.2017 the complainant again visited the opposite party for the purpose of removing the stunt, then they did the indoscopy and removed the stunt of the complainant.  At that time the doctors of opposite party fully assured the complainant that now there would be no any  difficulty to the complainant.  But despite of which on 20.09.2019 the complainant again felt pain in her stomach, then she went to Ashwani Hospital, sEctor-10, Faridabad, where she got admitted as an indoor patient on 20.09.2019 and remained there upto 22.09.2019 at that time the complainant spent Rs.17,927/- on her treatment.  Thereafter, the complainant went to ESI Hospital, Faridabad where she got admitted as an indoor patient from 22.9.2019 and remained there upto 26.09.2019 and after discharging from there the complainant went to Pawan Hospital, Faridabad, where she got admitted as indoor patient on 26.09.2019 and remained there upto 27.09.2019.  After that the complainant was taken to Sarvodaya Hospital, Sector-8, Faridabad, where she got admitted as indoor patient on 27.09.2019 and remained there upto 3.10.2019, as indoor patient and at that time the complainant spent Rs.2,90,999/-.  During that period, the doctors started that stunts were still lying in body of the complainant, but now there would be surgery

of the complainant.  After that the complainant got admitted on 3.10.2019 upto 12.10.2019 in ESI Hospital, Faridabad on 4.12.2019 but on the same day the complainant was reached to Sarvodaya Hospital, Faridabad where she got admitted as indoor patient on 4.12.2019, where she was operated by laser and for which they received Rs.75,000/- from the complainant.  The complainant remained there as indoor patient upto 6.12.2019.  The complainant spent total amount of Rs.4,24,525/- on her treatment, doctors fees etc. The complainant sent legal notice  dated 22.6.2020 to the opposite party but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:

a)                pay to the complainant Rs.4,24,525/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its due till realization of whole amount.

 b)                pay Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

c)                 pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.

2                 Notice issued to opposite party on dated 21.11.2022 not received back either served or unserved. Tracking details filed in which it had been mentioned that “Item Delivery Confirmed”. Mandatory period of 30 days expired. Hence, opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 21.12.2022.                   

3.                The complainant led evidence in support of his respective version.

4                  We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record on the file.

5.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against

opposite party – Advance Center of Dygistic – HP India & Ors. with the prayer to: a)     pay to the complainant Rs.4,24,525/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its due till realization of whole amount.  b) pay Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c)  pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses

                   To establish his case, the complainant  has led in his evidence Ex.Ex.Cw1/A – affidavit of Neelam Devi, Annex. C-1X-ray & ultrasound, Ex.C-2 – ERCP Report,, Ex.CW-3 – Gastrovision, Ex.CW-4 – Gastro-Duodenoscopy report, Ex.CW-5 – Gastrovision, Ex.C-6 –Investigation: MR Cholangiography (MRCP), Ex.C-7 – receipt, Ex.C-8 –Referral summary, Ex.C-9 - MR Cholangiography , Ex.C-10 -  Referral letter, Ex.C-11 – Case summary,, Ex.C-12(colly) – Final Bill,, Ex.C-13  & 14– Tax invoices, Ex.C-15 – Bill of supply, Ex.C-16 – ax invoice,, Ex.C-17 – bill of supply,, Ex.C-18 – tax invoice,, Ex.C-19 & 23 – bill of supply, Ex.C-24 – Tax invoice, Ex.C-25 & 26 – bills, Ex.C-27 – Bill of supply,, Ex.C-28 – Tax invoice,, Ex.C-29 – Bill of supply,,Ex.C-30 & 31– Bill of supply, Ex.C-32 – receipt, Ex.C-33 – tax invoice,, Ex.C-34 – Bill of supply, Ex.C-35 – Discharge summary, Ex.C-36 – Discharge summary, Ex.C-37 – legal notice, Ex.C-38 – postal receipt. Ex.C-39 – IPD Final bill, Ex.C-40  - Discharg summary, Ex.C-41 – IPD Final bill, Ex.C-42 – Final bill.

 6.               There is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid ex-parte evidence of the complainant. Since opposite party has not come present to contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid ex-parte evidence it is amply proved that opposite party has rendered deficient services to the complainant. Hence the complaint is allowed against opposite party.

7.                Opposite party is directed to  pay Rs. 4,24,525/- alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.  Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony  & harassment alognwith  Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.  Compliance of this order  be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  File be consigned to the record room.

Announced on: 17.05.2023                                  (Amit Arora)

                                                                                  President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                (Mukesh Sharma)

                       Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                   (Indira Bhadana)

                       Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.