| ORDER | Mandeep Singh Vs. Bharat Ultra Sound 12.8.2015:Present: Sh.Sunil Kumar Verma, adv. counsel for the complainant - It is alleged by the complainant that he is suffering from Hepatitis B Virus Surface since February,2014 and he is getting the treatment for the same from Dr.Harbans Lal Bansal MD (Medicine).
- It is further averred that the 1st Immunology-Serology test of the complainant was got conducted from Rapid Laboratory on 25.2.2014 and the said laboratory gave the positive report of the hepatitis. The second test was got conducted by the complainant from Modern Laboratory Clinic and Scan Centre and on the basis of the same he got the treatment from aforesaid Dr.Bansal.
- The complainant got the Immunology-Serology test conducted from the Op on 10.1.2015 for, “Serum for Anti HCV IgG (Strip Method)-Non-Reactive, N.B.-All Viral Markers to be confirmed by Elisa Test, Hepatitis B Virus Surface Ag-negative”.
- After collecting the report from the laboratory of the Op, the complainant visited Dr. Harbans Lal Bansal, in connection with the treatment of Hepatitis B Virus Surface Ag, for which he was already getting the treatment but the doctor on going through the report said that the report given by the Op was not correct and advised him to get another report from another clinical laboratory. Accordingly the complainant got his test from Anand Computerized Clinical Laboratory, Patiala on 20.1.2015 and as per the report of the said Anand Computerized Clinical Laboratory, the test of the complainant was found to be positive for Hepatitis B Virus Surface Ag. At this the complainant visited the Op and consulted the staff of the laboratory in respect of the wrong report given to him but he was misbehaved. Then he met Mr.Sharma, the incharge of the laboratory but he also misbehaved with him. At this, the complainant got the Op served with a legal notice dated 2.3.2015 but the Op failed to respond.
- It is further averred that after relying upon the report of the Op, the complainant ignored the disease and he started consuming everything which was prohibited by the doctor in respect of the disease. The life of the complainant is in danger. He had also to suffer physically and mentally because of complainant’s test having not been conducted with due care and caution and the act of the Op is said to be an unfair trade practice. Accordingly the complainant has brought this complaint against the Op asking for a compensation in a sum of Rs.50,000/- on account of the harassment, humiliation and the mental agony experienced by him; to pay him a sum of Rs.three lacs on account of the unfair trade practice and further asking for the payment of Rs.10,000/- towards the litigation expenses.
- The complainant has produced on file Annexure 7, copy of the report dated 25.2.2014 obtained by him from Rapid Laboratory, Patiala showing the test of HBs Ag as positive. He has also placed on file the prescription given by Dr.Harbans Lal, MD (Medicine) for the test of HBs Ag Carrier and the reports of the Modern Computerized Clinical Laboratory produced alongwith Annexure 3 as Annexures 4, 5 and 6.
- The complainant has also produced on file the report of Immunology test obtained from Modern Laboratory Scan Center on 7 October,2014, showing the result of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen as positive.
- Then the complainant has produced on file the report dated 10.1.2015 obtained by him from the Op in respect of the Immunology-Serology for “Serum For Anti HCV 1gG (Strip Method)=Non-Reactive N.B.= All Viral Markers to be confirmed by Elisa Test Hepatitis B Virus Surface Ag Negative”.
- The complainant has also produced on file Annexure 1, the copy of the Immunology-Serology report dated 20.1.2015 obtained by him from Anand Computerized Clinical Laboratory. The report shows the HBsAg; to be positive.
- Thus, the complainant has tried to show that all the Immunology-Serology reports obtained by him from Rapid Laboratory, Modern Computerized Clinical Laboratory and Anand Computerized Clinical Laboratory gave the positive results in respect of HBsAg but the report Annexure 2 obtained by him from the Op on 10.1.2015 gave the report regarding the same as negative.
- It is merely alleged by the complainant that relying upon the report of the Op he ignored the disease and started eating everything which was prohibited by the doctor and his life is in danger. It is also alleged by the complainant that after getting the report from the Op he approached Dr.Harbans Lal, in connection with the treatment of Hepatitis Virus Surface Ag, regarding which he was getting the treatment earlier but the doctor told him that the report obtained by him from the Op was incorrect and he should get the test conducted from another clinical laboratory and then he obtained the report from Anand Computerized Clinical Laboratory dated 20.1.2015 showing the result of the hepatitis B Virus Surface Ag as positive. Nowhere, it is alleged by the complainant that he was advised by the doctor Harbans Lal to rely upon the report obtained by him from the Op. Similarly nothing is alleged by the complainant as to what particular eatables were prohibited by Dr.Harbans Lal and how the consumption of the same by him affected his health. All this had to come from the medical record, which is not produced.We really fail to understand as to how the complainant could ignore the advice given by Dr.Harbans Lal against eating particular items of food especially when he had shown the report obtained by him from the Op, showing the result of the Hepatitis B Virus Surface Ag as negative.
- Merely because the Op gave a wrong report is not a ground for the complainant to file the complaint against the op because it is provided under Section 14(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, “If after the proceedings conducted under Section 13, the District Forum is satisfied that the goods complained against suffer from any of the defects specified in the complaint or that any of the allegations contained in the complaint about the services are proved, it shall issue an order to the Op directing him to do one or more of the followings:
a , b and c : Not applicable (d) to pay such amount as may be awarded by him as compensation to the consumer for any loss or injury suffered by the consumer due to the negligence of the Op. 13. In our case, the complainant has not alleged any loss or injury suffered by him because of the incorrect report given by the Op. The complainant has not produced on file any prescription given by Dr.Harbans Lal having prescribed against eating of any particular food items and the complainant has not made out any case having eaten any particular food item and if so how it affected his health. It is also not the case of the complainant that he asked the Op to refund him the fee for conducting the Immunology-Serology test on the ground that the same was found to be incorrect and therefore, no case of deficiency of service on the part of the Op primafacie can be said to have been made out. Consequently, we are of the considered view that no prima facie case of any negligence , unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of the Op is made out and therefore, the complaint is hereby rejected. Copy of the order be supplied to the complainant free of cost. File be consigned to the record room. Member Member President | |
