Kerala

StateCommission

1086/2004

Benoy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Aleyamma Kuriakose - Opp.Party(s)

S.S.Kalkura

11 Aug 2010

ORDER

First Appeal No. 1086/2004

(Arisen out of Order Dated 28/10/2004 in Case No. 552/2001 of District Kottayam)

1. Benoy

Oodupuzhayil House,Ramapuram P.O,Kottayam

BEFORE:
	SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA PRESIDING MEMBER

PRESENT:

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMIISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No 1086/04

JUDGMENT DATED : 11.08.2010

PRESENT:-

SMT. VALSALA SARANGADHARAN : MEMBER

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : MEMBER

SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER

APPELLANT

Benoy

Oodupuzhayil House,

Ramapuram P.O.,

Kottayam.

( Rep. by Adv. Sri.S.S. Kalkura, R.S. Kalkura & G.S.

Kalkura)

RESPONDENTS

1. Aleyamma Kuriakose

Kattupadath House, Edayar P.O.,

Koothattukulam,

Moovattupuzha.

Eranakulam.

2. Daisy Kurian,

Kattupadath House,Edayar P.O.,

Koothattukulam,

Moovattupuzha.

Eranakulam.

3. Saly Kurian

Kattupadath House,Edayar P.O.,

Koothattukulam,

Moovattupuzha.

Eranakulam.

(Rep. by Adv. Sri. Sajeevu Mathew & A. Sugunaraj)

APPEAL No. 1086/04

JUDGMENT DATED. 11.08.2010

SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER

This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kottayam in the file of O.P. No. 552/2001 dated 20.10.2004. The appellant is the opposite party who preferred this appeal from the above impugned order. The respondents are the complainants in the above O.P.

2. In short, the complainants are the legal heirs of the deceased James and the above said James was admitted in the hospital of the appellant for the treatment as a mental patient, Pizhaku, Ramapuram. This admission was on the basis of the Missionary Bhavan, recommended by a prayar group. The family members of James donated some amount to them. If any amount contributed on behalf of an inmate that will be utilized for his treatment. The balance if any necessary will be compensating from common fund of the society. According to the complainant they alleged that they admitted James in the hospital of the opposite party upon from assurance that his disorders will be completely cured within six months while the patient will be given adequate protection, Thereby they deposited Rs. 3,000/- on 2.5.2002 and subsequently for 6 months Rs. 6,000/- per month for the treatment payment to the opposite parties. On other words the opposite party appeared and contented in their version that the Missionary Bhavan is not an Ayurvedic hospital but only a charitable institution maintain as a shelter of mentally disordered neglected and abundant persons. They established and functioned with the object of social service. Absolutely no gain or profit only on gratuitous basis. The opposite party also contented that no assurance given to the petitioners. The contention regarding to the payment of money as consideration for the services is also contented by the opposite party. Cost of account of the case is in connection with the society of the above said James on 29.11.2002. He committed suicide by hanging himself on the grill of the chapel using his clothes which the petitioners contented to be solely due to the negligence and carelessness on the part of the opposite party which also denied by the opposite party. They claimed that they provided maximum care and protection to the inmate James.

3. The evidence consists of the deposition of second petitioner who cited as pw1, on evidence the deposition of the O.P. and another witness examined as Dw1and Dw2. The documents were marked as Exts. A1 to A8 and B1 to B8. The Forum below passed an order and taken a view that the suicide of the mental patient James was incident due to the deficiency in service committed by the opposite party and found that the opposite party is liable to pay compensation for the death of the James.

4. In the result the Forum below directed the opposite party to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation and cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the petitioners within 45 days of the receipt of the order. This order was challenged by the appellant before this Commission.

5. On this day this appeal came before this commission for final hearing both counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the respondent/ complainant are present. They argued vehemently, their own cases before this Commission. This commission heard in detail and perused the entire case records. It is revealed that this is not a dispute arised from the treatment of mental patient by the hospital. There is no evidence adduced by the complainant to support their case that the appellant/ opposite parties was conducting treatment center or any other alternative medical hospital. The complainants once taken back James in to their house and again admitted in the very same institution. It is more and enough to shows that the complainants are fully satisfied about the accommodation, care and protection of James. The complainants were not in a position to keep the victim James in their house. He was a burden to them. In that circumstances they were searching for a place to dump this poor mental patient in some where. In their part, they found out a suitable place for admitting James. Then, they admitted him in the rehabilitation center of the opposite parties. Diceased James was a problem to them. Even the family members have such a negative attitude a brother and son, how they are blaming the appellant institution. A society consists of individuals. According to the theory of Social Contract, theory of Thomas Hobbes and John Locks, Society is nothing but a surrender of certain rights of individuals to the society. It is the primary stage of the present democracy.

6. In our society, the senior citizen mentally retarded disabled persons etc. are facing a huge problem. Mental patients, widows, senior citizens are burden for their own family members as well as the society. We are facing this as a big social problem. In these circumstances some persons and some charitable institutions came forwarded to admit them and to protect them as a part of their charitable work. It is certain extent a relief for our society. The complainant have no allegations about that the appellant did not obey the rules and regulations of the Mental Health Act. They are not having a clear idea about the suicide of the victim James.

7. Complainants appeared before the Forum below with this complainant without a clean hand. A question is naturally arised for the consideration. Even nearest and dearest people are not in a position to tolerate the above mentioned class of unfortunate people. In such a circumstance they have no right to question a third party who had given a shelter to such people. The complainant’s right was estopped by the second admission of the James in the institution of the opposite party.

8. It is a well established fact that in this case is that this is not a medical negligence case. It is a case in connection with the deficiency alleged against the opposite party regarding negligence and carelessness in their charitable institution.

9. From the evidence it is clearly seeing that James was suffering from maniac, a mental decease since so many years. His close relatives such as father and some other persons also committed suicide. A suicide is a mental state caused due to so many reasons. It is silent movement to the death. Suppose a person is suffering maniac and depression, in this chronic stage he may be committed suicide.. Mental illness of the deceased suffered due to so many reasons . Changes of metabolism of the body and changes of the hormones also for the reasons. Reasons for the mood changes of a person is signal of maniac and depression. Mentally ill persons are need not exhibit the symptoms of their illness in some cases. But the maniac persons and mentally depressed persons are choosing their own way to commit suicide. Their disordered mind is searching their own fruitful ways. According to them the horrible sound of the train is a sweat melody and the flame of the fire may be an inspiration. A close study and watching about this patient is highly necessary and helpful in certain extent to save this mental patients and can be saved them from suicide. In the enquiry, family systems of Kerala is one of the reasons. No person is having sufficient time to observe the behavior of his family members. At present we are having a nuclear family system. In India the statistics shows that the Kerala is having highest percentage of suicide. However of a day 26 persons are committing suicide in Kerala. Anyway it is a very serious Social situation of our state. In this circumstance the role of the charitable organizations are very notable. Some of these institutions are contributing so much help to mentally ill persons and to give counseling to the people having such a problem. But in this case the complainant have no evidence to prove their allegation that opposite parties committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

10. This Commission is seeing some apparent error in the order passed by the Forum below. We decided to interfere in this order. The order passed by the Forum below is not accordance with the provisions of the law and evidence. It is not legally sustainable. We are having sympathy to the poor victim James. But the absence of the evidence we can not do any relief to the complainant. It is a fact finding body. We have our own limitations. We are considering the evidence alone at the time of dispose the cases.

In the result, this appeal is allowed and set aside the order passed by the Forum below. Both parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. The points of this appeal discussed and rightly answered accordingly.