This complaint coming up before us for final hearing on                      27-07-11 in the presence of Sri Y.Kishore Kumar, advocate for complainant and of Sri G.Ramalingeswara Rao, advocate for opposite party, upon perusing the material on record, hearing both sides and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum made the following: 

O R D E R

Per Sri M.V.L.Radha Krishna Murthy, Member:

                This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant praying to issue receipt for the fee received by opposite party, wound certificate of complainant and case sheet by mentioning the particulars of the treatment given, and to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and for costs.

The brief averments of the complaint are as follows:

                On 03-04-10 while complainant was traveling in an auto from Repalle to Nallurupalem due to rash and negligent driving of the auto driver, the auto turned turtle and complainant received fracture injuries to her left ankle and all over the body including head.  The matter was reported to police at Repalle, who registered the same as crime No.49/10 under section 337 IPC against the driver of auto.                       Immediately after the incident, the complainant was shifted to Government Hospital, Repalle.   For better treatment on the same day the complainant was admitted in Amrutha Nursing Home, which was run by opposite party.  The opposite party treated the complainant and operated with P.O.P. Cast (Pindi Kattu) to the left ankle of the complainant.  The opposite party received an amount of Rs.1800/- towards his fee from the complainant in addition to other charges.  All the medicines were purchased by complainant. On             13-04-10 complainant consulted opposite party for revision by paying consultation fee of Rs.100/-.  The opposite party prescribed medicines and the same were purchased by the complainant on the same day in Amrutha Pharmacy located in the hospital of opposite party. On            24-04-10 complainant approached the opposite party and stated to opposite party that she was advised that she could get compensation amount and also medical expenditure from the insurance company of the crime vehicle         i.e., auto bearing No.AP7 TW 5263 and requested the opposite party to issue the bill for the fees received by him.  Then the opposite party asked the complainant to show original prescription, case sheet and bills.  Then the complainant has given the same to opposite party.  Opposite party torn the prescription, case sheet and bills and informed complainant that he would not issue any bill and that he would not attend before any Court for giving evidence about the treatment given by him.  Then the complainant questioned the opposite party as to why he torn the prescription, case sheet and medical bills for which opposite party abused the complainant and asked her to do whatever she could do.   Further opposite party refused to remove POP Cast (Pindi Kattu) even though it has to be removed after six weeks.  Complainant got POP Cast (Pindi Kattu) removed by another doctor.  Later complainant came to know that opposite party refused to issue wound certificate to Repalle Police also. Opposite party committed mischief by tearing the prescription, case sheet and medical bills and insulted the complainant by abusing her, which amounts to deficiency of service.  Hence, the complaint.

Opposite party filed his version, which is in brief as follows:

                Several averments made in complaint are false, incorrect and invented for the purpose of this complaint.  Complaint is not maintainable either in law or on fact. Opposite party had no knowledge nor he was informed that on 03-04-10 complainant while traveling in auto received fractures to her left ankle and injuries all over her body including head due to the accident of said auto in view of the negligent driving of the driver, that the matter was referred to Repalle police, who registered the same as crime under section 337 IPC against the driver of auto, that immediately after the incident, the complainant was shifted to Government Hospital, Repalle, for better treatment on the same day complainant was admitted in Amrutha Nursing Home, which is being run by this opposite party.   The complainant was never treated in the opposite party’s nursing home and never admitted in the hospital of this opposite party as an inpatient.  It is false and incorrect that this opposite party received an amount of Rs.1800/- towards his fee from the complainant in addition to other charges.  In fact complainant never informed this opposite party that it was a case of accident, more so the report was given to police in which case it is medico legal case.  It is also not informed that the complainant was taken to Government Hospital, Repalle.  Had it been the case there would have been intimation from Repalle Hospital to police at Repalle.  Withholding all these facts from being informed to this opposite party, complainant came to hospital, complaining that she had a fall and received an injury and as such this opposite party only gave first aid as per the procedure required for the injury.  

                As the complainant never happened to be an inpatient in the hospital of this opposite party, the question of giving case sheet and bills as alleged by complainant does not arise.  It is absolutely false and incorrect that this opposite party torn away prescription, case sheet and bills.  The complainant was never the patient of this opposite party and the retail sales cash memo dt.13-04-10 is a brought up one and in all probability they might have purchased medicines for their own use having been prescribed by somebody else and pressed into service only to make a false claim against this opposite party.   The claim of complainant is not tenable, baseless and against law.  Hence, complaint may be dismissed with costs.

                The complainant and opposite party filed their respective affidavits in support of their versions reiterating the same.

                On behalf of complainant Ex.A1 to A5 are marked. No documents are marked on behalf of opposite party.

Now the points for consideration are

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

POINT No.1

                The case of complainant is that while she was traveling in an auto on 03-04-10, the said auto turn turtle due to rash and negligent driving of its driver, that she received injuries and that a report was given to police and it was registered against the auto driver, that the complainant was shifted to Government Hospital, Repalle, immediately after the incident and later on the same day for better treatment she was admitted in the hospital of opposite party where she was treated by opposite party, that opposite party received an amount of Rs.1800/- towards his fee,  that on 24-04-10 when she approached the opposite party for issuing bill for the fees received by her, the opposite party collected the original prescription, case sheet and bills from complainant and torn them and refused to give any bill and also did not remove the POP and that she later went to another doctor and got the POP removed and that thereby the opposite party committed deficiency of service.

                The case of opposite party is that he was not informed of the accident, giving report to police etc. by the complainant that he has only given first aid and that he did not receive Rs.1800/- as alleged by the complainant and that the cash memo dt.13-04-10 was a brought up one in order to make a false claim against opposite party and that there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.   

                Ex.A1 is the FIR registered by Repalle police basing on the report of husband of complainant, that on 03-04-10 while the complainant was going in an auto, the said auto was turn turtle due to rash and negligent driving of driver of auto and that she received injuries in that accident.  Soon after the accident complainant was treated at Government Hospital, Repalle and she was advised to visit Orthopedic OP No.15, GGH, Guntur, an endorsement to that effect was made on Ex.A3 showing the investigations advised and the medicines prescribed on the date of accident i.e., 03-04-10 itself.  As seen from Ex.A4 and A5, the complainant approached the opposite party and paid Rs.100/- towards registration fee (vide Ex.A4) and left ankle AP/LAT view was taken under Ex.A5 on receiving Rs.120/-.  Later on 13-04-10 the complainant purchased medicines prescribed by opposite party in the medical shop of opposite party under Ex.A2 wherein the name of opposite party was shown as the doctor who prescribed the said medicines.  Thus a perusal of Exs.A4 & A5 clearly show that they were issued by the hospital of opposite party and that subsequently complainant purchased medicines under Ex.A2 in the medical shop of opposite party since it bears the rubber stamp of the hospital of opposite party.  In all these Ex.A4, A5 and A2 the name of opposite party is shown as the doctor concerned. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that the complainant has approached opposite party on         03-04-10 i.e., on the date of accident itself and that she was treated by opposite party for her injuries.  But the opposite party contends that he has only given first aid to the complainant and that she was never the patient of the opposite party and the retail sales cash memo dt.13-04-10 Ex.A2 is a brought up one and in all probability they might have purchased the medicines for their own use having been prescribed by somebody else.  As already stated above Ex.A2 cash memo contains the rubber stamp of the opposite party hospital wherein the opposite party was shown as the doctor concerned.  Therefore, Ex.A2 proves that the above said contention of opposite party is not true.  Therefore, it can be safely concluded basing on Ex.A4, A5 and A2 that opposite party has treated the complainant and failed to issue certificate to that extent.  The complainant alleged that opposite party has received Rs.1800/- towards treatment and when she approached the opposite party to give receipt for the amount received by him the opposite party collected original prescription, case sheet and bills from the complainant and torn them and refused to give any receipt.  The complainant has not placed any evidence in order to prove the above said contention.  However, as already stated above it can be safely concluded that the complainant has approached the opposite party on 03-04-10, the date of accident itself and the opposite party treated her for her injuries as evidenced under Ex.A4, A5 and A2.  Since the opposite party has failed to issue necessary certificate for the treatment given by him to the complainant and also failed to give receipt for the amounts received by him she approached this Forum.   Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of case and in view of foregoing discussion, we are of the opinion that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. Accordingly this issue is answered in favour of the complainant. 

POINT No.2

                The complainant prayed to direct the opposite party to issue receipt for the fee received by him and for issuance of wound certificate and case sheet mentioning the particulars of treatment given to her.  Further complainant prayed to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards damages for the mental agony suffered by her and to pay costs. The amount claimed towards compensation for the mental agony is too high and it is imaginary.  Therefore, we feel that it is just and proper to award compensation of Rs.3000/- and costs of Rs.1000/- besides issuing direction to issue receipt for the fee received by him and to issue case sheet to the complainant by mentioning the particulars of treatment given to her would meet ends of justice. Accordingly this issue is answered.

                In the result, the complaint is allowed in part in terms as indicated below:

1. Opposite party is hereby directed to issue receipt to the complainant for the fee received by him and case sheet for the treatment given to her.
2. Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.3000/- to the complainant towards compensation for the mental agony suffered by her and also to pay an amount of Rs.1000/- to the complainant towards the costs.
3. Above orders shall be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amounts ordered in item No.2 shall also carry interest at 9% p.a. till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Junior Stenographer, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 29^th day of July 2011.

          MEMBER                                                                         PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                        DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite party:   NIL                          

                                                                              PRESIDENT