Sri S.K.Sahoo,President.        

            This  is   a  complaint petition  filed by the   Smt.  Puspalata  Naik  U/s. 12  of C.P.Act  1986.

2.       The  case  of the  complainant  is that  she  is  a permanent  resident of Vill Jamunda  of Angul district. On 05.03.2011  on the  advise   of opp.party No6. She  has  under  gone  sterilisation  operation  at Bantala C.H.C along with  some  other  females of  her  village. Dr. Mahes Prasad Rout  (opp.party No.3  )  has done  the  sterilisation  operation .After  lapse of  15 days  of the said  operation the  complaint  was  under conception and  consult the  health  worker  and the  doctor available  at   Bantala C.H.C. Both of them advised her   for  abortion. The  complainant  came   to Angul  and   examined  by  Dr. Gourisankar Bal ( O &G Specialist )  who   ascertain  that  she has  been conceived. On 09.06.2011  the  complainant   informed   about her   conception  to the  medical officer Bantala C.H.C  and  C.D.M.O,Angul . No step was taken  by  them.  The  complainant  is  a  poor  lady   and   Pana  by  caste. Her  family consists of  six members , out  of  which three are her  female  child and one  male  child. It is   very  difficult  to maintain her  family. On 09.11.2011  the  complainant  was  blessed with a   female  child  at C.H.C,Bantala   with  much problem. It is very difficult  on the part   of the   complainant  to  look after  her family.  As  there is  deficiency in  service  provided by the  opp.parties   the complainant  was  pregnant  . Hence  this  case for  compensation  along with  other  relief/reliefs.

3.       On perusal of the  case record  it   appears that opp.party No.1,2,4,5 &  6 have  not  filed their  written statement. Opp.party No.3  has  filed the  written statement without   his  signature. The Asst. District Medical Officer (F.W & I mm, Angul)  filed  a  written statement on 22.05,2012  who is  not  a party in this case. Opp.party No.7  filed  its  written statement  .

          The  case of  opp.party No.7  is that  the  case is not  maintainable in the  eye   of   law .The  complainant  is  not  a  consumer at  all. The case is bad for  non-joinder  and  mis-joinder   of  necessary party. Inspite of  repeated request the complainant   has not filed  the  policy of  insurance  .The  complainant   failed to  file  the  insurance  policy .The  opp.party No.7  should  be deleted as the complainant has not  raised any complaint  before  opp.party No.7. The  opp.party No.7  is  the  custodian  of  public  fund  and   bound by the  rules and regulations framed by IRDA. The  allegations  made against opp.party No.7  is false. The  complainant  is  not  entitled to the  compensation at  all.

4.       The  complainant  has  filed  certain  documents  along with  her  complaint. On perusal of  complaint petition  it  transpires , it is  supported  with affidavit. From the  complaint petition  it is  clear that   on 05.03.2011  the  complainant  was subjected to sterilisation  operation  at  C.H.C, Bantala  by opp.party No.3  with the  help of  medical staffs. It   is further  clear  from the  complaint  petition that on 09.11.2011  the complainant  was  blessed with a  female  child   in   Bantala C.H.C. From the  photo copy of the documents it is  also  clear that  after various  examination  of complainant   and  execution  of  an application by her  for   operation   the complainant   was  subjected to sterilisation  operation   by  opp.party No.3. Admittedly  no fee  was received  from the  complainant   for  her  sterilisation  operation  , so absolutely  the  operation was free of  charge and no consideration has  been received  from  her. However, from the  copy of the  application  form  filed  by the complainant  it is  clear that she knows that the  sterilisation  operation  may not be  successful and  she can  not   make the doctor  or the medical  responsible for  such failure. It is  also  clear from the application filed by her  that  she   had  agreed  for  abortion  within  two  weeks  of her pregnancy  in case of  failure of  sterilisation  operation .At paragraph-4 & 5  of the  complaint petition  she has  mentioned that  after failure of  sterilisation  operation  she  consulted  health worker and the doctor of the Bantala C.H.C  , who suggested  her  for  abortion. So it  is clear that   without    going  for  abortion  as  agreed by her, she  does  not  opt for  abortion  although advised  specifically. So  from her  own application form it is  clear that  she  had  agreed not to raise any  claim  against  the  doctors or  health worker .  However as per the prevailing family planning insurance policy of Government of  India,  opp.party No.1 & 7 are jointly liable  to pay  Rs.20,000.00 to the complainant  towards compensation.

5.         Hence order :-

: O R D E R :

            The  case be  and the same  is allowed in part, exparte against opp.party No.1 to 6 and on contest against opp.party No.7. The opp.party No.1 and 7 are directed to pay an amount of Rs. 20,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only  along with  interest  @ 9% P.A since March, 2012  till it is paid to the  complainant within one month from receipt of the order, failing which they have to pay penal interest @15% per annum.