JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for  the following reliefs-

1. The Op be directed to pay the amount Rs.200000/ incurred   in treatment of the complainant.
2. Compensation for harassment Rs.100000/.
3. Litigation expenses Rs.10000/.

1. Complainant stated that he contacted  Vardan Hospital on 11.03.2016 for treatment of his eyes where he was operated upon for Cataract in the right eye. He visited the hospital on different dates and he had undergone treatment as per advice of the OP and paid the fee but the condition of the eye had gone worst under his treatment due to his negligence. Complainant had undergone treatment of the eyes at Gandhi Eye Hospital, Deendayal Upadhyay District Hospital, Aligarh and J.N. Medical college, Aligarh where it was found that the condition of his eye became worst on account of negligence of the OP. Complainant had incurred money in treatment and he had suffered mental pains and economic loss.
2. OP has stated that he is the eye specialist and he has 15 years’ experience in treatment of the eyes. On 11.3.2016 the complainant was operated upon for Cataract in right eye with the application of the lens and he was discharged on 12.3.2016. Till the date 14.4.2016 the Complainant got checked the eye and he was asked to come for checking of the eye after a month but he came after 3 month on 4.7.2016 and on 7.7.2016. It was found on blood test and montaux test that there was  apprehension of T.B. and he was advised for T.B. Gold Test and he was advised for further treatment by the specialist. It is not known whether he had undergone T.B. Gold Test or not but he had been suffering from redness in the eye and complaint of pain on 4.7.2016 which shows that he had no suffered any problem on account of operation as if he had suffered any problem during the period of quarter to 3 month after operation, he would have undergone treatment of a doctor. Complainant has filed a prescription dated 9.7.2016 issued by Gandhi Eye Hospital in which it is mentioned that his vision is diminished for a week and pain and redness since a month. It shows that there was no complaint on account of operation within three months. The prescription dated 28.12.2016 issued by J.N. Medical College shows that vision diminished since a month meaning thereby vision was right for 8 months after operation and there was decline in vision since one month. The perception dated 6.1.2017 contains ENDOGENOUS ENDO PHTHALMITIS (RE) meaning there by the infection catched the eye through flow of blood. It shows that no doctor pointed out any wrong in performance of the operation in the eye of the complainant. In prescription dated 28.12.2016 issued by the J. N. Medical College contains on its back, PCIOL in bag RE, meaning thereby the lens was properly placed. Thus there was no negligence in providing treatment to the complainant.
3.  Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. And Op has also filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings.
4. We have perused the material available on record and heard the OP’s counsel.
5. The first question of consideration before us is whether there was any negligence on the part of OP in providing treatment to the complainant.
6. Complainant has not specifically mentioned the acts amounting to negligence in performing operation of Cataract in his right eye and  providing treatment by the OP. Complainant has made general Statement regarding damage to his eye after operation. On the other hand OP has specifically mentioned the treatment given to the complainant and he  pointed out about apprehension of T.B. in the eye of the complainant and he  specified its cause after expiration of about 3 months from the date of operation. He has given explanation for not attributing any negligence on his part in performing Cataract operation in the eye and providing treatment. His explanation is supported by prescription of Gandhi Eye Hospital and J.N. Medical College. We are of the view that the Op cannot be made liable for negligence in providing treatment to complainant.    
7. The question formulated above is decided against the complainant.
8. We hereby dismissed the complaint.
9. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
10. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.