DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA

Received by way of transfer Consumer Complaint No.85 of 2018

                                               Date of institution: 05.02.2018

                                               Date of Decision: 23.08.2022

Upinder Singh son of Avtar Singh, resident of 840, Basant Avenue, Ludhiana

…….Complainant

Versus

1. Corporate Centre of SRL Limited, 635-L, Upper Ground Floor, Model Town, Ludhiana through its Managing Director/Manager/Authorized signatory.
2. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 1-2-25/16, 3^rd Floor, Dr. Atma Ram Estate (TMC Building)Hyderabad Kijkatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana through its Incharge Service through its Divisional Manager/Branch Manager/Divisional Office/Branch office at Clock Tower, Near Bank of Baroda, GT Road Ludhiana     

                                                          ……..Opposite Party

 QUORUM:   

  HON’BLE MR. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT.

                   HON’BLE MRS. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

PRESENT:

Sh. Upinder Singh, complainant in person  

Sh. Baljit Sharma, Adv. For OP1

Sh. Ajay Sharma, Adv. for OP2

ORDER

RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act at Ludhiana, and transferred the same to District Consumer Commission, Ropar, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the opposite parties are providing all types of medical diagnostic to the General Public through its authorized center by SRL Limited at this Center all types of medical test are being conducted by the Medical Officer. In the month of December, 2017, the complainant received a message from said company through message on his mobile about the medical package offer and keep into the matter after watching the complainant visited at above center at Model town Ludhiana where the complainant got test conducted by Medical representative. After getting the report the complaint was to be shocked that as per his previous medical history the fresh report of Triglycerides was unusually high at danger point. Thereafter, the complainant got depressed and rushed to his family doctor Mr. Inderjeet Singh Bagga M/s Bagga Nursing Home Phase-I, Dugri Ludhiana. It is further alleged that after verifying report doctor advised to re-again the medical test a per saying him that if the report would have been OK then you would have got bed ridden and after getting information the complainant got his test again at National Diagnostic Laboratory Model Town, Ludhiana and after getting the report as per previous of his medical history the same declared as positives by said laboratory and after receiving of reports the complainant approached said center SRL than representatives of SRL Center visited at home of complaint where he collected blood sample of the complainant and again conducted the test through medical representative and after this the report was declared as OK as per previous medical history. Due to this act and conduct of negligence of the center the complainant got depressed and harassed and hardship and mental agony from the center which would not be fulfill in any way. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs against the Ops:-

1. To pay the amount  Rs.95,000/- as mental torture and agony
2.  To pay compensation of Rs.1000/- as litigation charges.   

2.       Upon notice, the OP1 has filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complainant is filed purely with the intention to tarnish the clean image and bring disrepute to opposite party good name and goodwill. There is no element of negligence in service rendered by the opposite party to the complainant; that the complaint filed by the complainant with no cause of action, as the opposite party carry out tests with at most care and diligence through high quality of lab equipments; that the present complaint is related to alleged medical negligence and expert opinion need to be take before reaching at any conclusion; that the present complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands; that the complainant has suppressed the material facts from this Commission; that the complicated issue of facts and law are involved in this present case. On merits, it is stated that the complainant got depressed and rushed to his family doctor. As per the complainant, it is submitted that the complainant got the report of 18.12.2017 at 10.10 AM and he visited the doctor on 20.12.2017 at 17.58 after lapse approximately three days hence no question arise for any such panic a alleged by the complainant. The documents on record filed by the complainant reveal that the complainant was not in any trauma state of mind as alleged. Moreover, the alleged negligence by way of discrepancy in the values of tests cannot be adjudicated in absence of report of independent expert is required to ascertain alleged negligence. Rest of allegations leveled by the complainant against the answering OPs have been denied and prayed for dismissal the complaint.

3.     In reply, the OP2 has taken preliminary objections; that the present complaint is false and frivolous as appeared from the complaint itself; that the present complaint is abuse of process of law; that the present complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant/insured has not lodged any claim with the answering OP; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the answering OP; that the present complaint is vague one. On merits, it is stated

that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the answering OP. Rest of allegations made by the complainant against the answering OP has denied and prayed for dismissal the same.

4.     In support of the complaint, the complainant has tendered various documents. On the other hand, the OPs also tendered certain documents in support of their version.

5.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.

6.     In the totality of the circumstances, the OP1 has admitted the factum of the alleged test report claimed by the complainant, however he has vaguely tried to justify the same but without any admissible corroborate evidence.

7.     In the circumstances of the case, the complainant is entitled in lump sum to Rs.20,000/- due from the day of alleged test report along with interest @ 9% till payment. He is also entitled to lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses. OP No.1 is liable to make all these payments to the complainant. As regards insurance contract between OPS No.1 & 2, the same has no effect on the present case/complaint by the complainant. However, the OP1 will be free to enforce his right under the contract of insurance with OP2, available under law, if so desired by him. ree certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be sent back to the District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana, for consigning the same to the Record Room.

August 23, 2022

(Ranjit Singh)

( Ranvir Kaur)