In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 63 / 2011.
1) Prof. Sita Ram Behani,
1/9A, Dover Lane, Kolkata-700029. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Dr. Tapas Sinha, Director, Smile & Profile,
144A, Rash Behari Avenue, Kolkata-700029.
2) Dr. Mrinalini Sadhya, Smile & Profile,
144A, Rash Behari Avenue, Kolkata-700029.
3) Dr. Sourav Ghosh, Super Specialist in Root Canal Therapy Treatment,
Behari Avenue, Kolkata-700029. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member
Order No. 1 5 Dated 20/02/2012.
The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Prof. Sita Ram Behani gainst the o.ps. Dr. Tapas Sinha and others. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant aged about 69 years visited the dental clinic viz. Smile and Profile at Kolkata with his dental problem in lower 7th molar tooth. The attending doctor on examination opined that root canal therapy treatment was necessary to protect the tooth. On 19.10.10 Dr. Dadhya started RCT treatment of the lower 7th molar tooth of the complainant and the complainant was told that on crowning after 3rd sitting the treatment will be completed and the cost of the package will be Rs.5000/-. But on completion of the 1st sitting a huge infection in the teeth occurred followed by swelling of gum together with severe pain. For this complainant visited the clinic several times but no relief was afforded. On 26.10.10 the attending doctor prescribed medicine for remission of pain but no substantial relief was there after exhausting profuse expenses by complainant. Complainant thinks that drilling, sealing and x-raying of the tooth caused severe damage to is body and the drilling was done in a rough and crude manner that the complainant jumped from the chair owing to severe pain. For this pain complainant had to remain confined three weeks in his house and had to cancel the classes in City College being a faculty member. Further case of the complainant is that at the time of drilling his 7th tooth was broken owing to rough drilling and the attending doctor gave irresponsible assurances to cure his problem and debarred him from having treatment from elsewhere to have relief. Subsequently complainant consulted with Dr. Sourav Ghosh and the Director of the o.p. and both of them told him that the treatment was properly done. Later followed by phone call was made by complainant for obtaining a date for examination but no response was there from o.p’s side. Finding no other alternative complainant visited Prof (Dr) H.D. Adhikary on 24.1.11 with pain and sensitivity with tooth for his advice and the said doctor on examination of x-ray opined that during drilling there was a bone injury and there was little possibility of subsiding the pain and implantation of crown would be remedial method. Still the complainant is suffering from pain and sensitivity in his tooth and unable to use right side of his jaw properly. Hence, the instant case.
O.p. had entered its appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against it and prayed for dismissal of the case.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is an admitted position that complainant underwent treatment of his teeth in o.ps’. clinic in the name and style Smile and Profile and that position has not been denied by o.ps. in their w/v. Now the moot point to be adjudicated as alleged by complainant is that in course of treatment the attending doctor did not take proper care while handling drilling process and etc. and caused damage of his teeth resulting him severe pain and sensitivity and such damage could not cured by an independent doctor other then the empanelled doctors of o.ps. viz. Prof (Dr) H.D. Adhikari, BDS (Cal), MDS (Bhu), In-charge and Post Graduate Teacher, Deptt. of Conservative Endodontics and Cosmetic Dentistry, Dr. R. Ahmed Dental College and Hospital, Kolkata. We have gone through the prescription of the said specialist doctor wherefrom it appears that “Complaining of pain after endodontic treatment done from elsewhere tooth no.7 lower jaw and the said doctor also observed that some portion of the tooth was broken and despite the treatment by the said doctor complainant is having problem still with pain and sensitivity”. Dr. Adhikari the subsequent doctor is a specialist of government hospital viz. R. Ahmed Dental College and Hospital and his opinion can well be construed as an expert’s opinion in the context of the facts and circumstances disclosed on record. It is also seen from the record that complainant sought for appointments on various days but he was not given date after cropping up problems in his teeth and on the contrary o.ps. denied such contention of the complainant, but surprisingly enough o.ps. in their w/v stated that complainant was given so many appointment but no document has been produced by o.ps. in this regard.
We have considered the entire materials on record and having due regards to the observation made above and keeping an eye that the complainant is an educated senior citizen and professor by profession on oath cannot be expected to distort facts and we find no reason to disbelieve the statement made by the complainant on oath.
In view of the above findings we are of the view that the o.ps. had sufficient negligencies in the matter of taking care in course of treatment of the complainant of his teeth being a service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest against the o.ps. with cost. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to pay the treatment expenses of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only and compensation of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only to the complainant within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.
_____Sd-_____ ______Sd-_______
MEMBER PRESIDENT
