Smt.Chandni Sharma complainant has filed this complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 against the opposite parties praying that opposite parties be directed to make the payment of Rs.20,00,000/-  as compensation to her on account of mental tension, physical agony and harassment and also on account of treatment of the complainant from other hospitals including litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.           The case of the complainant in brief is that she was pregnant and getting her general check up and medicines from the Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur where the opposite party no.1 was serving as Genealogist but the opposite party no.1 used to pressurize her to come to the Hospital of his father-in-law in the name and style of Babbar Heart Care Centre and General Hospital, Govt College Road, Gurdaspur for further checkup and treatment. She also stated that the opposite party no.1 used to force many other pregnant ladies to come at her Babbar Hospital for further treatment and checkup. So, she went to Babbar Hospital where the opposite party used to gave medicines and treatment by taking charges and fees for the same. So, there is relation of consumer between her and the opposite party no.1.She has further pleaded that she and her family members were well aware that there is need of three times ultrasound of the pregnant lady. Firstly in 5^th month, then in 7^th month and lastly in 9^th month of pregnancy. The opposite party got her ultrasound in 5^th month and at that time the condition of Foetus was absolute alright but when she went to the opposite party no.1 in 7^th month for ultrasound and check up then the opposite party stopped her from getting ultrasound but the opposite party no.1 did not permit her for the same. In the 9^th month, when she went to the private hospital of the opposite party no.1, then she ordered her to get the ultrasound report. On 3.4.2015 she got ultrasound from Kumar Scan Centre, Gurdaspur and produced the report but the opposite party no.1 immediately after seeing the report told her that her child in the womb had already died. She was shocked to hear the same and her condition became critical. They requested the opposite party no.1 that her condition is serious due to the death of child in the womb and there is possibility of spreading of poison in the body. On this, the husband of the opposite party no.1 Dr.Manjinder Singh Babbar, father in law Dr.K.S.Babbar came to spot and openly told that they cannot help them and they took her to some other doctor for her treatment.  Her condition seeing more critical, she was taken to Mehak Hospital, Behrampur Road, Gurdaspur. But after issuing Medical Slip and making her check up, the concerned Doctor openly informed that she be taken to some other Hospital as due to negligence of earlier Doctor, their case had spoiled and serious. Then she was immediately taken to City Hospital, Gurdaspur, where Doctor after seeing her critical condition and on request of her family agreed to treat her. The Doctor after many efforts and using their vast experience and knowledge saved her life and took out the dead child from the womb.  She and her family member have felt huge shock and sadness that the child in the womb was developed one and the same was male child. The doctors have clearly given the opinion that due to negligence of their earlier Doctor for not getting the Ultrasound in 7^th Month, this mishappening has taken place because had the doctor got the Ultrasound in 7^th Month then if any weakness or problem was with the Womb it must be got treated. But the opposite parties have fulfilled her duty with utter negligence and same is clear  cut deficiency in service. Similarly thereafter she refused to help her in any manner rather left her to die. If the opposite parties have got her Ultrasound done and given correct medical advice then her child would have never died in the womb. She  got discharged from the City Hospital, Gurdaspur after three days and then her parents went to the opposite parties in their Private Hospital and informed about the loss occurred due to their wrongful medical advise. But the opposite parties used uncivilized language towards them and openly told that they can do whatever they want. The opposite parties belong to a very influential family of the City Gurdaspur, having links with many high profile people. On the other hand, she is very poor lady and her family earned livelihood by the way of labour. The opposite party No. 1 has brought shame to the medical profession with their act and conduct. She had only one motive to stand her private Hospital instead of treating the poor general public coming in Govt. hospital Gurdaspur for their treatment. Rather forcing them to come at her Private Hospital to fill their pocket with money in place of helping any poor. She has further pleaded that the opposite parties no.3 and 4 are well aware that they are Govt. Doctors instead of serving at Civil Hospital Gurdaspur are running the Private Hospital or giving services at their residence to patients by taking huge amount of fees, medicines and commission on medical tests. The opposite parties no.5 and 6 have kept their eyes closed on such complaints  which has encouraged the opposite party No.1 to compel the patient to come at their private Hospital. Most of all, the Doctors of Govt. hospital used to take incentive from Govt. for not running private practice, so that they can perform their duty properly in Govt. hospital. But the opposite party No.1 had also committed illegal act by concealing this fact from her department. The present case is also one of clear case of deficiency of services on the part of the opposite party and they are liable to compensate her. She has suffered huge set back due to the death of her child in the womb due to wrong medical advise and treatment given by the opposite party no.1 which will be never compensated in the whole life. She has moved application to various higher authorities and even got the same published in News paper.  The present case is clear cut case of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.

3.           Opposite parties no.1 to 4 appeared through their counsel and filed their joint written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable. On merits it was submitted that opposite party no.1 has never given any treatment to the complainant. The opposite party no.1 is a government doctor and do not treat patients privately as she has busy schedule at the Civil Hospital Gurdaspur. The opposite party no.1 has been unnecessarily targeted and harassed by the complainant. The complainant has been filed with a mollified intention to target the whole family of the opposite party no.2. Complainant may be put to strict proof regarding her checkup at civil hospital, Gurdaspur, treatment at Babbar Hospital and making payment from the complainant to opposite parties for any kind of treatment.  The Private Hospital of the opposite party no.2 is a Heart Care Centre and General hospital and there is no specialist gynecologist which is required for the treatment of female patients like complainant. As such the opposite party no.2 or the Babbar Hospital is not a specialist for Gynecologist patients as alleged by the complainant. The complainant has never consulted opposite parties for any kind of treatment. As such there is no prescription slip was ever issued from the Babbar Hospital to the complainant. They have further submitted that Babbar Hospital has also opened a Clinical Laboratory where any individual can get clinical tests/analysis conducted at his own. In case a patient wants to get clinical test who has no reference from any doctor, the Lab Technician use to mention the name of Respondent no.2 in the column “reference by”. As the lab is open to general public it might be possible that complainant has got her clinical tests conducted at the Clinical Lab of Babbar Hospital. Moreover, the tests which were conducted in the Clinical Lab regarding which the complainant has attached slips are general tests of temperature, Typhoid, Kidney test etc. There is no test report which can show that any test is relating to pregnancy of the complainant conducted at Babbar Hospital. The name of the respondent no.2 is mentioned in column of reference by doctor in both Ultra sound scanning, for that it might be possible that any family member from the family of the complainant might have obtained reference slip from the Respondent no.2 because without reference slip from any doctor no ultra sound and scanning center will conduct ultra sound and scanning of patient. As such from the complaint mostly it could be inferred that complainant has got conducted tests from the clinical lab of Babbar Hospital and she procured reference slip from the opposite party no.2 for conducting ultra sound and scanning. In this way the complainant has misled the court by wrongly stated that she was treated by the opposite parties. That complainant must be put to strict proof regarding her treatment from opposite party no.1. All other averments made in complaint have been denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.

4.       Opposite party no.5 and 6 also appeared through their counsel and filed their joint written reply taking the preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable and no cause of action has accrued to file the present complaint against the opposite parties.  On merits, it was denied that opposite party no.5 and 6 have kept their eyes closed on such complaints and which has encouraged the opposite party no.1 to compel the patient to come at their Private hospital. It was also denied that most of all the doctors of Govt. Hospital used to take incentive from Govt. or not running private practice, so that they can perform their duty properly in Govt. Hospital. Actually, if the complainant aggrieved in this regard she should have brought to the notice of the opposite party no.5 that she has got treatment under Dr.Annaya Babbar in Civil Hospital at Gurdaspur and she has not given treatment in the Civil Hospital Gurdaspur intentionally also pressurized it came to the Hospital of father in law in the name and style of Babber Heart Centre College Road, Gurdaspur. It was submitted that the opposite parties are incharge and competent authority of the opposite party no.1. A complaint has been received from the Govt. against the opposite party no.1 in the office of opposite party no.5 and the same was marked to District Family and Welfare Officer, Gurdaspur for enquire the matter and submitted report. The Distt.Family and Welfare Officer has conducted the enquiry and he found  the opposite party no.1 as innocent and report was submitted to the opposite party no.5. After receipt of the enquiry report by the opposite party no.5, the same was forwarded to the Director Health and Family Punjab Chandigarh vide office memo no.9385 dated 30.6.2015. So, the opposite party no.1 was found innocent in the complaint and she is not entitled any compensation as alleged in the present complaint from the opposite parties no.5 and 6. All other averments made in complaint have been denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.

 5.      Complainant tendered into evidence her own affidavit Ex.C1 and of Rajinder Kumar Ex.CW-3 along with other documents Ex.CW2 to Ex.CW20 and closed the evidence.  

6.       Counsel for the opposite parties no.1 to 4 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Kartar Singh Babber Ex.OP 1 to 4/1 and closed the evidence.

7.         Sh.Sawinder Kumar Hans Asstt. Civil Surgeon, Gurdaspur tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-5,6/1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP-5,6/2 to Ex.OP-5,6/4 and closed the evidence.

8.      We observe that the complainant has somehow failed to produce (on records) any direct cogent evidence or even otherwise any link evidentiary document supporting her prime allegation of being under medical advice/ consultation and/or treatment/attendance (pertaining to her pregnancy) of the OP1 doctor either at the civil hospital or at the OP4 Hospital; and going by the secondary evidence coupled with collateral multi-shot efforts/petitions, even if, we admit the above allegation in its presumed probability, we do not find any ‘evidence’ on record indicating the statutory infringement of consumer rights of the present complainant. Further, it is not understood as to how the OP1 doctor could have forced the complainant not to go in for the conduct of ‘ultrasound graphics’ in her 7th month of ‘family-way’. There has been no ‘expert-opinion’ produced to authenticate the alleged ‘flaws’ in the medical advice/consultation/treatment etc. No hospital records of subsequent medical treatment were summoned or the attending doctor was produced/summoned as witness to prove the allegations of faulty medical treatment. Even, the OP doctors were not subjected to cross-examination to determine the falsity of their rebuttal. The depositions in the absence of supporting evidence amount to nothing more than ‘bald’ statements and do not qualify for favorable statutory awards.      

9.     In the light of the all above, we do not see any merit in the present complaint and thus ORDER its dismissal with however no orders as to its costs.

10.      Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.

(Naveen Puri)

                                                                               President.                                                                                

ANNOUNCED:                                          (Jagdeep Kaur)

August 04, 2016                                                             Member.

*MK*