Order by:

Sh.Mohinder Singh Brar,  Member

1.       The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 stating that the complainant admitted in the hospital of Opposite Party on 14.02.2018 and being a doctor Opposite Party got operated complainant by placing hip bone and after giving treatment, Opposite Party released the complainant from the hospital. All the instructions given by Opposite Party about the health of complainant was followed by her, but inspite of that complainant always suffering from severe pain and complainant even could not walk without the help of walker. Thereafter, the complainant was usually walking with the help of walker and she could not walk properly without the help of walker, so the complainant time and again visited the Opposite Party with regard to said complaint, but the Opposite Party did not do any needful and health condition of the complainant out of tolerance and complainant suffered severe pain upto four years and usually on bed rest and on 07.01.2022, the Opposite Party advised the complainant for revisions of hip bone, but the complainant denied to operate herself again. Thereafter on 17.06.2022, the complainant herself visited Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot, where the doctor on duty conducted the proper check-up of the complainant and suggest her to change her hip bone once again by doing surgery as the same was not installed properly by Opposite Party, then the complainant again got change her hip bone from Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot by spending huge amount. Due to act and conduct of the Opposite Party, the complainant has suffered physical pain as well as financial loss. Alleged that the Opposite Party issued a legal notice to complainant, which was duly replied by complainant. Hence, this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-

a)       Opposite Party may be directed to pay the genuine claim of the complainant alongwith Rs.25 lakhs as compensation on account of unfair trade practice, deficiency in service and harassment.

b)      To pay Rs.51,000/- as litigation expenses.

c)       And any other relief which this Commission may deem fit and proper be granted to the complainant in the interest of justice and equity.

2.       Opposite Party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form as there is no technical fault or negligence upon the part of answering Opposite Party. Averred that the answering Opposite Party is prestigious doctor and is renowned person of the locality and is specialist in Trauma and Joint replacement having degree of M.B.B.S, M.S., M.CH. (Ortho), MIOA and also Ex.PCMS, Ex.Ortho Specialist, Civil Hospital, Moga and Ex.Registrar SGTB Hospital, Sri Amritsar Sahib. Averred that the complainant has not locus standi to file the present complaint and there is no expert opinion of the specialist doctor against the treatment of answering Opposite Party, which indicate any negligence on the part of Opposite Party in treatment. The complaint is false and file to harm the reputation of the Opposite Party. Averred further that on 23.10.2022, the complainant alongwith Bhagwant Singh son of Harjinder Singh made a video clip viral on social media thereby harming the reputation of answering Opposite Party after leveling false and baseless allegations upon the Opposite Party. Then after receiving the said viral video the answering Opposite Party receives so many phone calls and massages regarding the alleged story of viral video, then the answering Opposite Party issued a legal notice on dated 28.10.202 to the complainant alongwith Bhagwant Singh. The complaint has filed a false and baseless allegations on the Opposite Party. On merits, all other allegations made in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.

3.       Complainant has filed replication to the written reply of Opposite Party denying the objections raised by them in its written reply and submitted the procedure for hip replacement in the replication.

4.       In order to prove his case, the complainant has placed on record his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C11 and tendered in additional evidence Ex.C12.

5.       On the other hand, Opposite Party has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.OP1 and also placed on record copies of documents Ex.OP2 to OP10 and also placed on record original x-ray, photocopies of same are Ex.OP8 to Ex.OP10.

6.         We have heard the ld. counsel for both the parties and also gone through the documents submitted by complainant and Opposite Party. Complainant was admitted in Sandhu Bone and Joint Hospital, Moga on 14.02.2018 and x-ray (Ex.OP9) was done on the complainant on the same day for her hip. On the basis of this x-ray, surgery was conducted on her left hip. She remained admitted in the hospital for 7 days under the care of doctor. Then on 22.02.2018 x-ray of left hip (Ex.OP-8) was also done, which shows that operation was successful and she was discharged from the hospital.

7.       As per the record submitted by the complainant from 22.02.2018 to 24.12.2021 (approximately for three years), she never make any complaint to the doctor concerned about his surgical problem, if any. On 24.12.2021 vide OPD slip no. 944 doctor observed that “Bipolar head to migrate inwards” due to which she referred to institution for Revision Hip, but she insisted to get it done here only.” Thereafter, she approached to Guru Gobind Singh, Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot and got her surgery done from there and got admitted in the said hospital for the period 17.06.2022 to 29.06.2022. There is no expert report of Medical Board’s observation on the file, which apparently shows that there is any negligence on the part of the doctor as alleged by the complainant. Moreover, in order to prove the medical negligence the complainant has to place on record full prove evidence, which she failed to place on record. So, apparently there is no medical negligence on the part of Opposite Party (doctor). Even complainant never makes any complaint to the doctor from 22.08.2018 to 24.12.2021. Further perusal of the legal notice (Ex.C8) reveals that the complainant with the help of Bhagwant Singh also known as Pardhan Mantri, Baje ke started harassing the Opposite Party (doctor) by uploading the video of doctor on Social Media and Opposite Party (doctor) issued a legal notice (Ex.C-8) to complainant on 28.10.2022. So, to safeguard her from the legal notice, she filed a complaint before this Commission. Thus, we observe that there is no negligence on the part of Opposite Party doctor.

8.       In view of the above discussion, the instant complaint is hereby dismissed. Keeping in view of the peculiar circumstances parties are left to bear their own costs. The pending application (s), if any also stands disposed of. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced on Open Commission