BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 177 of 2013.
Date of Institution : 4.10.2013
Date of Decision : 30.1.2017.
Mewa Singh son of Sh. Gurdev Singh, resident of village Bhiwan, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa (Haryana).
……Complainant.
Versus.
- Dr. Ramesh Kumar son of Sh. Lal Chand, resident of village Bhiwan, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa.
- Dr. G.S. Gupta, Sigma Hospital Dabwali Road, Sirsa, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa.
- Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Branch Manager, Sirsa, policy No.221303/482013/1076 w.e.f. 25.6.2012 to 24.6.2013.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH.S.B.LOHIA………………. ……PRESIDENT.
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ……… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. S.L. Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite party no.1 exparte.
Sh. A.K. Gupta, Advocate for Opposite party no.2.
Sh. Rakesh Bajaj, Advocate for opposite party no.3.
ORDER
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that in the month of June, 2013 he became ill and was suffering from pain on his private part. He contacted op no.1 for getting treatment who checked him and advised him to admit in Sigma Hospital, Sirsa with assurance that op no.2 will provide good and proper treatment. The op no.1 brought him to Sigma Hospital, Sirsa and got admitted for treatment. The op no.2 checked the complainant on 5.6.2013 and got him admitted in the hospital and started treatment with the assurance that he will provide best treatment and will remove infection. The complainant remained admitted there w.e.f. 5.6.2013 to 24.6.2013. The op no.2 charged a sum of Rs.1000/- per day for room and other medicine charges as well as visit fee. The complainant could not gain relief in any manner during the period of 20 days rather his condition deteriorated day by day and he was suffering from serious pain. The complainant as well as his relatives stated to op no.2 that complainant is not getting any benefits of his treatment rather he is facing serious consequences and pain upon which ops in collusion with each other misbehaved with complainant and threatened not to disturb the op no.2 in conducting said treatment. The ops have charged a sum of Rs.25,000/- from the complainant forcibly and did not issue any receipt despite repeated requests and demands. The relatives of complainant got him discharged from the hospital forcibly and brought him to Bishnoi Hospital, Sirsa for treatment where doctor got him admitted and checked thoroughly and found that treatment given to complainant was not proper rather the ops have wrongly treated him and due to this reason his condition deteriorated day by day. Dr. Bishnoi asked the complainant to bring prior treatment record from the op no.2. The complainant as well as his relatives approached and requested the ops to give treatment record so that next treatment may be given to him but ops misbehaved with them and also refused to give any treatment record. Dr. Bishnoi admitted the complainant and given treatment and also conducted operation after that his condition became proper. Dr. Bishnoi obtained Rs.30,000/- from complainant for treatment. Due to act and conduct of the ops No.1 & 2, the complainant has suffered huge financial loss as well as harassment and pain. The complainant served a legal notice upon ops with request to refund a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant but to no effect. Hence, this complaint for a direction to the ops to refund the said amount and to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- on account of harassment etc. and also litigation expenses.
2. On notice, opposite party no.1 did not appear despite service and was proceeded against exparte.
3. Opposite party no.2 appeared and filed written version to the effect that answering op is a well qualified M.S. (General) and has been running a well equipped nursing home in the name and style of Sigma Nursing Home for the last more than eight years. The complainant was admitted in the hospital of the answering op having a serious foul smelling discharge from scrotum and was found to be a case of gangrene scrotum on 5.6.2013 and he was got examined by way of ultra sound tests and color Doppler and also other laboratory tests were got conducted which confirmed the findings of answering op. Besides it, he was also a patient of uncontrolled diabetes. The treatment was started and was regularly checked up and wound debridement was done according to the requirement. Thereafter, regular dressings were being done. The complainant remained admitted up to 11.6.2013 and was improving day by day. But on 11.6.2013 the complainant without telling anybody and without paying the bills of the hospital and pharmacy absconded and even caused damage to the machine of the hospital. An application was also moved to SHO, City, Sirsa in this behalf. It is incorrect that complainant remained admitted up to 24.6.2013. Rest of the averments of the complaint have also been denied.
4. On being impleaded, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. as op no.3, it appeared and filed written statement to the effect that liability of the answering op to indemnify the insured is subject to certain terms and conditions as laid down in the insurance policy.
5. By way of evidence, complainant has produced his affidavit Ex.C1, medical bills Ex.C2 to Ex.C26, copy of legal notice Ex.C27, copy of acknowledgment Ex.C28, copies of postal receipts Ex.C29 and Ex.C30, copy of prescription slip of Bishnoi Nursing Home Ex.C31. On the other hand, op no.3 tendered affidavit Ex.R1. OP no.2 tendered his affidavit Ex.R2, copy of indoor file Ex.R3, copy of prescription slip Ex.R4, copy of report of colour Doppler of scrotum Ex.R5 and copy of slip Ex.R6.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
7. The complainant has alleged that he remained admitted in the hospital of opposite party no.2 but the copy of indoor file produced by op no.2 as Ex.R3 falsify the version of the complainant according to which he was admitted in the hospital of op no.2 and was discharged on 11.6.2013. It is also mentioned on the file that complainant absconded from the hospital at 11.40 a.m. on 11.6.2013. In the indoor file, the whole treatment of the complainant given by op no.2 is mentioned. According to the op no.2, the complainant was admitted in his hospital on 5.6.2013 and at that time he was having serious foul smelling discharge from scrotum and was found to be a case of gangrene scrotum and all the necessary tests were got conducted which confirmed the finding of op no.2. The complainant was also having uncontrolled diabetes. Wound debridement was done according to the requirement and thereafter regular dressings were done. Proper treatment was given to the complainant and he was improving day by day. In the copy of report of colour Doppler of scrotum Ex.R5, it is mentioned that large collection with air foci seen in left scrotal wall with edematous changes. There is nothing on file to suggest that opposite party no.2 did not provide proper treatment to the complainant according to the disease or wrongly diagnosed the disease. There is no expert opinion on the file to prove that op no.2 was in any way negligent in giving treatment to the complainant or that no proper treatment has been given by him. The complainant has placed on file copy of prescription slip dated 26.6.2013 of Bishnoi Nursing Home, Sirsa but from that document, no negligence of any kind on the part of op no.2 is proved. There is also nothing on file to prove that op no.2 charged amount of Rs.25,000/- from the complainant or that any extra amount was charged by op no.2.
8. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: 30.1.2017. Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
