Delhi

North East

CC/374/2022

Jay Prakash Rana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Guru Hargobind Sahib Charitable Hospital - Opp.Party(s)

12 Apr 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.374/22

In the matter of:

 

	Jay Prakash Rana, S/o Late Sh. Budhpal Singh, R/o H.No. A -93, Gali No. 1, Brahampuri, Delhi (Through its SPA Holder Mr. Ashish Kumar)	Complainant
	Versus
1.         2.	Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib Charitable Hospital At 765, Jheel Kuranja, Delhi 110051   Dr. H.A Shah, MBBS, MD. General Physician, DMC 16986 At 765, Jheel Kuranja, Delhi 110051	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                         DATE OF ORDER  :

22.09.2022 27.02.2024 12.04.2024

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Adarsh Nain, Member

ORDER

 

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant has filed the present complaint through his Attorney namely Mr. Ashish Kumar who has been authorized vide Special Power of Attorney dated 15.09.2022. Complainant stated that he was suffering from severe back pain, pain in abdomen and on 04.07.2022 he visited Opposite Party No. 1 for the treatment where he met Opposite Party No. 2. Complainant stated that Opposite Party      No. 2 told the Complainant that he was having water in his lungs that is why the Complainant was having severe back pain, pain in abdomen and cold/cough but Complainant did not have cold/cough. Complainant stated that Opposite Party No. 2 treated the Complainant for many days and injected the Complainant for 15 days regularly thrice a day and charged Rs. 50,000/- for the treatment and tests. Complainant stated that Opposite Party No. 2 also gave a medical certificate dated 04.07.2022. Complainant stated that his disease had increased because of treatment which was given by the Opposite Party No. 2. Complainant stated that despite 9 days of the treatment when Complainant had no relief then he visited Sir Ganga Ram Hospital where he got admitted from 20.07.2022 to 25.07.2022. Complainant stated that treating doctors of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital told that he had suffered from bone loss in his backbone and they also told that if the Complainant had not come on time, he would have died. Complainant stated that he got the treatment from Sir Ganga Ram Hospital where he was operated and they fixed his backbone through cut/bolts, thereafter, the Complainant became perfectly fit. Complainant stated that he spent Rs. 5-6 lacks in his treatment. Complainant sent a legal notice to Opposite Parties. Complainant also sent a legal demand notice on 18.08.2022 to the Opposite Parties and Opposite Party No. 2 sent a false and fabricated reply. Complainant stated that Opposite Party No. 2 had treated wrongly and did not perform his duty properly. Complainant has prayed for an amount of loss Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- i.e. spent on the treatment in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. Complainant also prayed for an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of mental harassment and Rs. 11,000/- on account of litigation expenses. 
2. None has appeared on behalf of the Opposite Parties to contest the case despite service of notice. Therefore, Opposite Parties were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 10.02.2023.

Ex- Parte Evidence of the Complainant

3. The Complainant in support of his case filed the affidavit of Shri Ashish Kumar, SPA Holder, wherein he has supported the assertions made in the complaint.

Arguments & Conclusion

4. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file and written arguments filed by the Complainant. The case of the Complainant is that he was given wrong treatment by Opposite Party No. 2 who is doctor in the hospital of Opposite Party No. 1. It is his case that due to the wrong treatment given by Opposite Party No. 1 and Opposite Party No 2 he did not get any relief and thereafter he got himself admitted in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital where he was treated and a sum of about Rs. 5 lacs was spent by him in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and he also spent Rs. 50,000/- in the treatment given by Opposite Party No. 1 Hospital. The Complainant has not filed any document of any hospital or doctor to show that wrong treatment was given to him by the doctor of Opposite Party No. 1 Hospital. It is important to note that the Complainant has not filed his affidavit to support this contention. Therefore, we cannot say that the wrong treatment was given to the Complainant.
5. In the present case, the evidence of the Complainant has been filed by way of affidavit of Special Power of Attorney namely Shri Ashish Kumar. The Complainant has not filed his affidavit. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a recent case titled as Manisha Mahendra Gala & Ors. Vs. Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani & Ors., Civil Appeal no. 9642 of 2010 decided on 10.04.2024 has held has under:

“29. It is, therefore, settled in law that Power of Attorney holder can only depose about the facts within his personal knowledge and not about those facts which are not within his knowledge or are within the personal knowledge of the person whom he represents………………………….”

 

6. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the Complainant has failed to prove his case. Hence, the complaint is dismissed.

 

7. Order announced on 12.04.2024.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Adarsh Nain)		(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
(Member)		(President)