Date of Filing:14.12.2007<br /> Date of Order:26.02.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated: 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2009<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2494 OF 2007<br /> <br /> M.S. Venkatesh<br /> S/o. late M.S. Srinivasamurthy<br /> R/at 1142, Ashoknagar<br /> Mandya 571401 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> 1. Jupiter Hospital (Nursing Home)<br /> Represented by Dr. R. Muralidhar<br /> No. 28, 7th Main<br /> 9th Cross, Malleswaram<br /> Bangalore 560 003<br /> <br /> 2. Jupiter Hospital<br /> Represented by Smt. Lakshmi<br /> Clerk Cum phone attendant<br /> No. 28, 7th Main, 9th Cross<br /> Malleswaram, Bangalore 560 003 Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. <br /> The facts of the case are that mother of the complainant was admitted to opposite parties’ hospital. She was suffering from blood clots and later varicose-veins problem and the left leg developed venous ulcer and non healing ulcers over the ankle, leg and foot. Operation was conducted on 09.07.2008. She was put to ICU. Complainant paid Rs. 5,000/- to nursing home on 09.07.2007. On 10.07.2007 patient was shifted from ICU to ward. Complainant paid Rs. 10,000/-. Receipt was not issued to the complainant. Opposite parties insisted to pay Rs. 15,000/-. Same was paid on 14.07.2007 to opposite party No. 2. The attitude of the opposite parties was to grab and extract money from the complainant. Another Rs. 22,000/- was paid on 20.07.2007. Mother of the complainant discharged from the hospital. Opposite parties failed to give detailed bill. Altogether complainant has paid amount of Rs. 44,400/-. The case of the complainant is that mother of the complainant had died leaving behind only the complainant as her legal heir. The complainant prayed that opposite parties be directed to pay Rs. 44,400/- being expenses and also compensation.<br /> 2. Notice issued to opposite parties. Opposite parties put in appearance through advocate and defence version filed stating that complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Opposite parties submitted that complaint may be dismissed in limine. Mother of complainant Smt. Shanthamma was elderly lady of 70 years. She was admitted to hospital on 04.07.2007. She was very obese lady weighing nearly 95 kgs. She was admitted to hospital by the complainant after explaining to him the possible surgery and the risks in performing the same. Complainant and his mother agreed for all the procedures to be conducted and possible expenditure and number of days of hospitalization. It is only after the free consent of the complainant and his mother, the opposite parties have proceeded with the treatment. At the time of discharge she was walking normally without any pain and all her problems had been solved. She was told to come for checkup on 31.07.2007. It is the case of the opposite parties that the mother of the complainant did not turn up for follow-up treatment. The complainant has given comprehensive printed discharge summary with all the investigation report, X-rays, Colour Doppler report, advice on discharge and the bill. The opposite parties have submitted in para No. 10 of the version as under:<br /> “Jupiter hospital was constructed in the year 1997 for running a hospital only. Jupiter Hospital has a panel of consultants in all specialties and is recognized by all the insurance companies. The hospital has all the facilities like X-ray, ECG, Endoscopy, Colonoscopy, Ultra sound Scanning, Tread Mill ECG (TMT), and Digital Subtraction Angiography which is essential for Vascular Surgery setup. This DSA equipment is imported from Europe by a company in Mumbai and opposite parties have this equipment since 4 year in Jupiter Hospital. This is only one of its kind in Karnataka, with all these facilities, Jupiter hospital is a Hi-tech Hospital. Jupiter Hospital has 24 hours ambulance facilities for more than five years.”<br /> 3. The complainant deliberately not mentioned the date of death of his mother. Complaint has been filed with a malafide intention of making wrongful gain and harasses the opposite parties. There is no deficiency, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained and has been under taken to be performed by the opposite parties. For all these reasons stated above the opposite parties have prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.<br /> 4. Affidavit evidences are filed by both the parties.<br /> 5. Arguments are heard.<br /> 6. The points for consideration are:<br /> “1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?<br /> 2. Whether the complainant has proved that the amount paid by him to the hospital is in excess to the treatment given to his mother?”<br /> 7. I have perused the complaint and the defence version.<br /> 8. By reading the entire complaint the complainant has not made out any case of medical negligence on the part of the opposite parties. It is not the case of the complainant that opposite parties are negligent in treating his mother. The complainant has not even alleged any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties while seeking treatment to his mother. By reading the complaint it appears that complainant has got grievance that he has paid excess amount to the hospital for the treatment of his mother. It is the case of the complainant that in all he has paid Rs. 44,400/- to the hospital. The complainant wants that opposite parties be directed to refund Rs. 44,400/-. This kind of prayer is really absurd one. Admittedly, the mother of the complainant was admitted to opposite parties’ hospital and she had under gone operation and treatment given for various ailments. The mother of the complainant was 70 years old lady. It is stated by the opposite parties that she was very obese lady weighing nearly 95 kgs. The opposite parties submitted that after admitting the mother of the complainant the hospital authorities told and explained to the complainant the possible surgeries and risks in performing them and complainant and his mother agreed for all the procedures to be conducted and the possible expenditure and number of days of hospitalization and after the free consent of the complainant and his mother, the opposite parties have proceeded for the treatment and various tests have been conducted and surgery was conducted. There was skin grafting for ulcer. She was monitored in the ICU and she recovered well after the surgery without any complications. Thereafter she was shifted to ward and monitored well. Dressing of the grafted wound was also done and all the wounds healed. She was discharged on 20.07.2007. At the time of discharge she was walking normally and she was told to come back to hospital for checkup on 31.07.2007. It is the case of the opposite parties that she did not turn up for follow-up treatment. The complainant was given comprehensive printed discharge summary with all the investigation report and X-rays, Colour Doppler Report, advice on discharge and bill. The complainant attested his signature in the admission register. The complainant never mentioned date of death of his mother in the entire complaint. He has suppressed this fact for the best reasons known to him. The complainant having not alleged any deficiency in service or medical negligence on the part of the hospital his complaint before the consumer forum is not at maintainable. The same deserves to be dismissed. The complainant even not established by producing any evidence or documents to show that the amount paid by him towards treatment of his mother is excess. It is very difficult to hold that the complainant has paid excess amount to the hospital. On mere allegations of the complainant the case cannot be established or proved. The complainant has not produced any expert evidence or opinion or any rules or regulations to establish that for a particular treatment or surgery or hospitalization so much amount will be reasonably charged. Charging a particular fee by the hospital to a particular surgery or treatment depends upon the hospital rules and regulations. Charges vary from hospital to hospital or from doctors to doctors. By making grievance or complaint in respect of excess bill no purpose will be served. The complainant should have asked the probable expenses or charges before admitting his mother to the hospital for treatment. The complainant having admitted his mother to the hospital, the doctors have treated her for several ailments and diseases and the complainant has paid the bill amount. Thereafter, the complainant has filed the present complaint. This kind of complaint against the hospital is very unfortunate one. Such complaint cannot be entertained either in law or on facts. The present complaint is devoid of merits. Therefore, it deserves to be dismissed. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 9. The Complaint is dismissed.<br /> 10. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 11. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />