Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/376/2013

Ashok Sharma s/o Sh.Parmod Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dr.Pratyaksh Bhardwaj, - Opp.Party(s)

Amit Bansal

21 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                    Complaint No. 376 of 2013.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 17.05.2013   

                                                                                    Date of decision: 21.12.2016

 

Ashok Sharma aged about 22 years, son of Shri Parmod Sharma, resident of village Jaidhar, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna  Nagar.

 

               …Complainant.

                                    Versus

Dr. Pratyaksh Bhardwaj, C/o Shree Skin Care and Sliming Centre, 1403, Sector-17 HUDA Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                            

                                                                                                                       ...Resposndent.

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.

                          SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

 

 

Present:           Shri Amit Bansal, Advocate for complainant

                         Shri Rajiv Chawla, Advocate for OP. 

ORDER

 

1                       The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that he visited the OP Dr. Pratyaksh Bhardwaj, as he was overweight person and due to this he discussed his problem regarding overweight. Upon this, the OP gave an assurance that he will reduce the body weight of the complainant in just 20 days with the help of treatment as well as medicines. On the assurance of the OP complainant started taking treatment from him. At that time, the body weight of the complainant was 90 Kg. The OP assured the complainant that if the complainant remained continuous with the treatment, the weight of the complainant will be reduced by 20 kg within  3 months and the OP had charged a sum of Rs.20,000/- from the complainant for complete treatment for the period of 3 months, vide his bill  No.056 dated 09.02.2012. But despite adopting the complete advice and treatment of the OP, It was noticed by the complainant that after lapse of about 03 months, the body weight of the complainant was still about 90 Kg. Meaning thereby that despite getting proper treatment and diet as per the prescription given by the OP, the body weight of the complainant did not reduce. The OP remained, absolutely failed to reduce the body weight of the complainant in more than 06 months and ultimately the complainant requested the OP to refund the amount of Rs.20,000/- but he flatly refused to do so on one pretext or the other. In this way the OP, has not only cheated and defrauded the complainant but also caused physical harassment as well as mental agony and financial loss to him. Hence, this complaint praying therein that OP be directed to refund a sum of Rs.20,000/- along with interest as compensation as well as litigation expenses.  

3.                     Upon notice, OP has appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable; complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and on merit it has been admitted that complainant was an overweight person who had met him at his sliming center and discussed his problem.  However, it has been denied that the OP gave any assurance that the weight of the complainant will be reduced in 20 days. In fact, the OP told to the complainant that it is a yearly membership and complainant will have to follow all the terms and conditions, which has been laid down in the prescribed enrolment form. Further, it has been admitted that complainant was enrolled and joined the sliming center of the OP on 25.02.2012 and he had paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as fee to the OP on 21.02.2012 prior to joining the center (wrongly mentioned date of bill as 09.02.2012 by the complainant). Further, it has been mentioned that complainant did not follow the instructions/prescriptions advice chart given by OP. Further, it has been mentioned that after joining sliming center, the complainant had reduced his weight to the extent of 4.3 kg within 12 days from the date of joining. Lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX, copy of bill bearing No.56 dated 09.02.2012 as Annexure C1, Original Pamphlet/literature as Annexure C2, Copy of laboratory test as Annexure C3 and C4, copy of diet chart issued by OP as Annexure C5 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, ld. counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Dr. Pratyaksh Bhardwaj as Annexure RW/A and membership Form of the complainant as Annexure R1, Carbon copy of bill bearing No.56 dated 21.02.2012 as Annexure R2 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.

6.                     We have heard the counsels of both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file very carefully and minutely.

7.                     It is not disputed that complainant hired the service of the OP Doctor for reducing his overweight and paid Rs.20,000/-  to the OP doctor, which is duly evident from the copy of the bill No.56 dated 21.12.2012 (Annexure C1/R2). Further, this fact has also been admitted by the OP doctor in his written statement particularly in Para No.5. The only grievances of the complainant is that despite paying Rs.20,000/- and as per assurance given by the OP doctor, his weight could not be reduced. Learned counsel for the complainant draw our attention towards the pamphlet/literature (Annexure C2) published by the OP doctor, in which he has specifically mentioned that 5 Kg weight will be reduced within 20 days and further he mentioned his qualification as Gold Medalist dermatologist. Further, the learned counsel for the complaint draw our attention towards the diet chart given by the OP doctor (Annexure C5) and argued that complainant observed all the guidelines prescribed in the prescription slips/diet chart as well as literature but despite all that, OP doctor failed to reduce the weight of the complainant. Learned counsel for the complainant in support of his case referred a case law titled as Smt. Divya Sood Vs. Mr. Gurdeep Kaur Bhuhi, Revision Petition No.3467 of 2006 (National Commission), New Delhi, vide which the orders pressed by the District Forum Banglore accepting the complaint were upheld by Hon’ble State Commission as well as by Hon’ble National Commission and further learned counsel for the complainant referred another case law titled as “Bhanwar Kanwar Vs. R.K. Gupta & Anr., Civil Appeal No.8660 of 2009 reported in latest Supreme Court judgment and argued that in the present case also the OP Doctor is guilty of unfair trade practice and prayer for acceptance of the complaint.

8.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP Doctor argued that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP doctor as the fault lies with the complainant himself because he did not follow the instructions/prescriptions advice chart  given by the OP. Learned counsel for the OP further argued that after joining the sliming center of the OP, the complainant had reduced his weight to the extent 4.3 Kg within 12 days from the date of joining and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.                     After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that OP Doctor has played unfair trade practice by making a false statement orally as well as in writing by way of pamphlet/literature. Even, the version of the OP Doctor that complainant reduced his weight 4.3Kg within 12 days from the date of joining is also not tenable as no such cogent/documentary evidence has been placed on file. Further the OP Doctor also did not bother to place on file any weight chart maintained by him at his sliming center. The OP Doctor has not placed on file any attendance register to prove that the complainant remained absent and did not follow the instructions/prescription advice given by him.

10.                   In the circumstances noted above and after going through the facts of the case and law referred by the counsel for the complainant and further as the complainant had paid huge amount i.e. Rs.20,000/- for getting his weight reduced which he could not reduce. Hence, we are of the considered view that complainant is entitled to get some relief.

11.                   Resultantly, be partly allowed the complaint of the complainant and direct the OP Doctor to refund the amount of Rs.15,000/- after deducting Rs.5000/- on account of expenses which might have incurred by him. Further, the OP is also directed to pay Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses. Order be complied within a period of 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Pronounced in open court:

Dated: 21.12.2016.                                                                 

                                                (S.C.SHARMA)                        (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                           MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

                                                                                              DCDRF Yamuna Nagar