J U D G M E N T
Smt. Sarita Tripathy , Member - The complaint is filed on 01-09-2014 by the viction of a failure of sterilized operation conducted on 27-02-2008. Praying compensation of Rs 2,00,000/-.
The case of complainant in short is that she under went sterilized operation on 27-02-2008 at Bhapur Community Health Centre (C.H.C). But subsequently became serious. Then matter was informed to the Medical Officer Bhapur who on behalf of CDMO Nayagarh, gave her a cheque of Rs 30,000/-.
On 13-04-2011 she was admitted in Sum Hospital, BBSR and failure of sterilization operation she continued treatment by spending a huge amount beyond her ability. On 26-03-2012 she contacted one Narayan Das Advocate who is found to have noticed to C.D.M.O on 11-09-2012 she was appeared before CDMO Nayagarh for medical examination and found to have been tested by CDMO and 2 others doctors there after not received any compensation, this complaint was filed.
The op C.D.M.O vide letter No 5616 dt 10-10-2014 filed written version admitting the fact that the complainant undergone sterilization operation under National Programme conducted by State Govt. and for failure of sterilization operation as per state Govt. rule she has been paid Rs 30,000/- while admitting the above fact the op has relied upon judgment dt 08-12-2011 of state consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Odisha in C.D appeal No. 1295 /2003 to contend that the complainant is not a consumer. In order to substantiate the written version non of the Ops files their evidence on affidavit. Hence they have been set ex-parte on 07.11.2014.
The fact of the failure of sterilization operation being admitted, the maintainability of this proceeding depends upon the point on to whether
(1) Complainant is a consumer in the given facts to claim compensation ?
In the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble State Commission reiterates that the state of sterilization operation the law is well settled that in the case of sterilization operation, the operation is not 100% full proof and there might be re-connection and the lady, who under went sterilization operation might conceive. In the instant case the complainant not being the consumer as admittedly the sterilization operation was conducted in a camp organised by I.G.H., Rourkela even in present of doctor of Bisa C.H.C the complaint had not paid any consideration for the same and in no case, the complainant is a consumer and as such, the complaint was not maintainable before the District Forum. Hence it is ordered
ORDER
The complaint stands dismissed on ex-parte.
The final order is prepared by us, corrected,
signed, sealed and pronounced in the open
Forum on this 28th October , 2014.
