Haryana

StateCommission

A/665/2016

KRISHNA DEVI - Complainant(s)

Versus

BHAWANI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL - Opp.Party(s)

MUKESH YADAV

22 Nov 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

                                                First appeal No.665 of 2016

Date of the Institution: 01/20.07.2016

Date of Decision: 22.11.2016

 

Smt. Krishna Devi W/o Sh. Narender Singh S/o Shri Daula Ram, Caste Ahir, R/o  Village Bucholi, Tehsil & District Mahendergarh.

…..Appellant

Versus

1.      Bhiwani Memorial Hospital & Santosh Ultrasound Centre, Near City Post Office, Mahendergarh through its proprietor.

2.      Dr. Ramesh Aggarwal, MBBS, MS, Bhawani Memorial Hospital &  Santosh Ultrasound Center, Near city Post Office, Mahendergarh.

3.      The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Mahendergarh Road, Narnaul.

…..Respondents

 

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

 

Present:-    Mr.Mukesh Yadav, Advocate for the appellant.

 

 

O R D E R

R.K.Bishnoi, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

          It was  alleged by the complainant that in the month of May 2009 she had some problem due to enlarged anteverted uterus and got  ultrasound done from Krishana Diagnostic Centre Narnaul. When O.P.No.2 was consulted she advised an operation otherwise problem could be fatal.  She was admitted in the hospital on 05.06.2009 and Rs.20,000/- were deposited at that time including cost of surgery etc.  Even after operation on 05.06.2009 there was no improvement and her condition started deteriorating due to which she was asked on 08.06.2009 to go to some higher institute for further management. At the time of discharge neither discharge summary nor bill was handed over to them.  She remained admitted at Marudhar Hospital Jaipur from 09.06.2009 to 10.06.2009 and thereafter at Manu Hospital, Jaipur.  It was found that she was having some problem in left kidney besides other problems. She remained confined to bed for more than nine months and spent huge amount for treatment. O.Ps. be directed to pay Rs.Three lacs as of compensation.

2.       O.ps. filed reply controverting her averments and alleged that she was operated in free camp and nothing was charged. It was told that they could go to Sarbati Hospital, Mahendergarh.  Operation was conducted after proper investigation and ultrasound etc.  There was no negligence on their part.  She was not covered by the definition of “Consumer” because nothing was charged from her.  Objections about maintainability of complaint, accruing cause of action etc. were also raised and requested to dismiss the complaint.

3.       After hearing both the parties, learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Narnaul (In short “District forum”) dismissed the complaint vide impugned order dated  06.05.2016.

4.       Feeling aggrieved therefrom, complainant-appellant has preferred this appeal.

5.       Arguments heard. File perused.

6.       The complainant has miserably failed to show that any amount was paid during treatment at O.P.No.1.  Just on the basis of her oral statement it cannot be presumed that Rs.20,000/- paid when  O.P.Nos.1 and 2 have specifically denied payment as mentioned above.  As per section 2 (o) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (In short “Act”)  service is considered if any payment is made and not otherwise.  Any services rendered without any charge cannot be considered as service. So complainant is not covered by the definition of consumer.  More so she has also failed to show that the O.Ps. did not follow the proper procedure while conducting operation or they failed to act as per expected standard, so learned District Forum rightly dismiss the complaint. Resultantly appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed in limini.

November 22nd, 2016

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

S.K.