Andhra Pradesh

Chittoor-II at triputi

CC/36/2018

B.Gopal, S/o B.Chengalraya Chetty, aged 75 years - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kalyan, Dental Doctor - Opp.Party(s)

In person

21 Feb 2019

ORDER

         

 

                                                                                                Filing Date: 07-05-2018                                                                                                               Order Date: 21-02-2019

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, CHITTOOR AT TIRUPATI.

Present: - Sri.T.Anand, President (FAC)

                                                         Smt.T.Anitha, Member

 

 THURSDAY THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN

 

C.C.No.36/2018

Between

B.Gopal, S/o. B. Chengalraya Chetty,

Aged about 75 years, residing at

D.No. 7-80/2, Matha Street, Kothapeta,

Chandragiri town and Mandal,

Chittoor District.                                                                … Complainant

 

And

1. Kalyan, S/o. Not Known to the complainant,

Working as a Dental Doctor,

Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd.,

P.K.Layout, Tirupati.

 

      2.  K. Parthasarathi,

           The Managing Director,

           Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd.,

           P.K.Layout, Tirupati.                                               … Opposite parties

 

        This complaint coming on before us for final hearing on 04.01.2019 and upon perusing the complaint and other relevant material papers on record and on hearing of Sri.B.Gopal, party in person, and Sri.S.Manoj Kumar, counsel for the opposite parties having stood over till this day and for consideration, the Forum made the following.

ORDER

DELIVERED BY SMT. T. ANITHA, MEMBER

ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH

        This complaint is filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, complaining the deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties and prayed this Forum to direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to refund treatment amount of Rs.45,000/- paid by the complainant to the opposite party No.2 hospital and to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation to the complainant for damages to his teeth and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for giving wrong advice and to pay costs of the complaint. 

        2.The brief facts of the case are:  The complainant approached the second opposite party dental hospital on 11.06.2016 for treatment and opposite party No.1 who is the doctor working in opposite party No.2’s dental hospital  of Partha Dental Care  India PVT Ltd.,. The complainant further submits that, he visited the 2^nd opposite party hospital for  fixation of fixed denture for him, as he seen in the advertisements given by the 2^nd opposite party in newspapers and also in T.V. live show that they will provide best treatment.  The complainant further submits that right from first date of treatment the complainant was not happy with the treatment given by the opposite parties as the teeth fixed by the opposite party No.1 in opposite party No.2’s  hospital was not adjusted and fixed properly to his upper jaw in spite of several visits attended by him.  The complainant further submits that he went to the hospital on 11.06.2016 and paid a sum of Rs.150/- as registration charges and opposite party No.1 examined the complainant and advised him to come on next day for diagnosis. On 12.06.2016 the opposite party examined the complainant and advised him to take the  X-ray for his upper jaw and he paid Rs.400/- for X-ray charges after examining the X-ray, the opposite party No.1 advised the complainant that they will extract the remaining teeth as they were weak and suggested for fixed denture and the opposite party No.1 charged a sum of Rs.45,000/- for fixation of fixed denture. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 14.06.2016 and on the same day the opposite party No.1 removed all the remaining teeth and advised him to come after 20 days for taking the measurements of the artificial denture. Hence he approached the 1^st opposite party’s hospital after 20 days after taking measurements the complainant paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- as directed by the opposite party and the opposite party No.1 informed the complainant to come to the hospital in the month of August, 2016. Hence he went in the month of August, 2016 as per the instructions of the 1^st opposite party and he paid remaining  sum of Rs.15,000/- for affixing the artificial denture. And the first opposite party fixed the artificial denture in the second opposite party’s hospital. But the second opposite party issued bills for Rs.15,000/- only and they have not issued any bills for remaining amount of Rs.30,000/-.

        3. The complainant further submits that, within 10 days of affixing the denture it was loosened and he was not able to chew the food properly and he felt discomfort. Hence he approached the 2^nd opposite party and explained his problem, but the opposite parties replied that the denture was not matched to him and to go for “Artificial Removable Denture” and again they demanded for Rs.6,000/-. As the opposite parties failed to fix the denture properly, the complainant faced the problem and he demanded for refund of the amount paid by him to  the hospital authorities and questioned the same. But the opposite parties gave evasive answer and threatened him. The complainant further submits that, subsequently the complainant took treatment in Jagathi Multi Specialty Dental hospital & Implant Centre and paid a sum of Rs. 6,000/- for the fixation of the denture for his upper jaw. As the opposite parties 1 and 2 failed to fix the denture properly even after receipt of Rs.45,000/- which is nothing but deficiency in service on part of them.  Hence the complainant gave legal notice to the opposite parties on 22.12.2017. The complainant further submits that prior to giving the legal notice he lodged the complaint before east police station and the opposite party No.1 approached the east police station and agreed to repay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- to the complainant, but  he refused to receive the same. The complainant approached for better treatment in Vijaya Hospital, Chennai and spent of Rs.8,000/- for his dental treatment. As the opposite parties 1 and 2 failed to give proper treatment and caused mental agony to the complainant which is nothing but unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Hence he filed the present complaint.

        4. Opposite parties 1 and 2 filed written version by denying the allegations made by the complainant in the complaint and further stated that the opposite no.1 is working as a doctor in opposite party no.2 hospital and the complainant has taken treatment and went away and he did not approached the opposite parties at any point of time after taking the treatment as he concocted the story in order to get wrongful gain. The opposite parties further submits that there are no latches in their line of treatment and advices to him before taking the treatment and they have clearly explained the pros and cons of the treatment to the complainant and done the treatment. The opposite parties further stated that they  never deceived the complainant and issued the bills only  for the treatment given by them to the complainant . Hence there are no latches on their part as they have rendered service properly and the complainant unnecessarily thrown blame on them in order to get wrongful gain.

        5.  The complainant filed his evidence on affidavit and Ex: A1 to A12 were marked. On behalf of the opposite party no.1 filed his evidence affidavit and on behalf of opposite party no.2 the managing director of opno.2 hospital K.Partha Sarathi ,S/O P.V.Narsimhulu, filed his evidence on affidavit and no documents were marked on behalf of them. Both parties filed their written arguments and oral arguments were heard.

       6. Now the point for consideration is:-

        Whether there is any deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties? If so, to what extent, the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for?

                   7.Point:-  The counsel for the complainant stated that the complainant approached opposite party no.2’s hospital  for dental treatment and opposite party no.1 who is working as a doctor in opno.2s hospital  suggested him after extraction of remaining 4 teeth only it is possible to fix the denture.  Hence he accepted for the same and  opno.1 removed the remaining 4teeth in his upper jaw and fixed the denture and collected Rs.45,000/- towards denture charges. The counsel for the complainant further stated that the complainant felt discomfort  to chew the food,as the denture was loosened.  Hence he approached the opposite parties hospital but after thorough checkup the doctor informed that, the  artificial fixed denture was not matched to him and suggested to go for “Artficial Removable Denture” and demanded for Rs. 6,000/-. The counsel for the complainant further stated that the opposite parties failed to do the service properly and deceived the complainant when he asked the opposite parties which is nothing but deficiency in service on part of them.

           The counsel for the complainant further stated that the complainant approached the Vijaya hospital,Chennai for fixation  of  fixed denture for his upper jaw.  But the doctor of Vijaya hospital suggested to go for artificial removable denture and also stated that  it is not possible to fix the fixed denture with out any supporting teeth.  Hence  if the opposite parties  advised him as advised by the Vijaya hospital,Chennai, he may not agree for the removal of his 4 teeth in the course of their treatment. Hence the opposite parties mislead the complainant resulting his ill health and loss of weight as he could not chew the food properly,which is nothing but deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties.

   

     The counsel for the opposite parties stated that the opposite parties clearly explained the pros and cons of the “Artificial Denture Removable Teeth” to the complainant, after clearing up everything only , they have started treatment and they have done all the procedure of fixing the denture according to the medical course of action and also stated that basing on the requirement of size and number of teeth the hospital and doctor charges will be initiated as it is line of work of the doctors. The

Counsel further stated that there is no involvement of opposite party no.1 as the opno.2 hospital authorities fix the charges,hence opposite party no.1 is no way concern for the  payment made by the complainant.

     The counsel for the opposite parties further argued that the complainant had taken treatment and went away . The complainant never approached them at any point of time after taking treatment and also the opposite parties never demanded Rs.

6,000/- for the artificial denture. Hence the complainant concocted the story in order to get wrongful gain from the oppositeparties. Hence there is no deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties towards the complainant.  The counsel for the opposite parties further stated that, the Hospital Authorities is having the insurance policy from United India Insurance Company Limited  for Professional Indemnity Doctors Dental Care Policy No.5005002718P107888602 which is in force from 01-09-2018 till date. Hence the opposite parties are strictly following the medical procedure and service to the patients perfectly. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismiss.

 

 

        After perusing the record filed by both the parties there is no dispute regarding the treatment taken by the complainant in opposite party no.2s hospital. and he paid regn.charges of Rs.150/- under Ex.A.1 dated 11.06.2016 , and also the complainant got marked exhibits A3,A4 &A5 receipts for the payment of Rs.5,000/- each in total the opposite parties received Rs.15,000/- and the same was admitted by the opposite parties. The main case of the complainant is  the opposite parties fixed the artificial fixed denture to his upper jaw by removing existing 4 teeth and collectedRs45,000/- towards denture charges but they issued receipt for Rs.15,000/- only.  The said denture was not fixed properly and got loosened.  Hence he could not chew the food properly and he felt discomfort and lost the weight. Even after several visits to the opposite parties  and also after receipt of the legal notice Ex.A.6 dated 22.12.2017, they failed to  fix the same and deceived the complainant and sent  the reply notice with false and frivolous allegations under Rx.A7 dated 14.02.2018 which is nothing but deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties.  The complainant got marked  Ex.A.9 medical bill issued by jagathi Multi speciality dental hospital and implant centre dated 20.12.2017 for single upper jaw denture done and paid Rs.6000/-. The complainant marked Ex’s.A10 & 11 dated 02.03.2018 which was issued by the Vijaya Hospital, Chennai regarding the dental treatment of the complainant and also he got marked Ex.A.12 dated 13.03.2018  receipt issued by Vijaya hospital,Chennai for Rs2,000/- for denture.  The counsel for the complainant stated that the opposite parties unnecessarily removed his  remaining 4 teeth in his upper jaw  and the Vijaya hospital doctors adviced under

Ex.A.8 for the complete denture for upper jaw (removable) and in the same prescription it was mentioned that fixed denture- not possible.  But the complainant failed to file the affidavit of the doctor of the Vijaya hospital to prove his bonafides and also the experts only can tell the condition and strength of the jaw of the complainant as he is aged about 74 years. The complainant filed Ex A.9 receipt of  jagathi hospital for fixations denture dated 20.12.2017 for Rs6000/- and also he filed Ex A.12 receipt for 2,000/- dated 13.03.2018 for denture. Which clearly shows that the complainant approached two hospitals for fixing the denture with in 3 months. Because in jagathi hospital the complete upper jaw denture was  fixed and also under Ex.A.8  prescription of Vijaya hospital advised the complainant for complete upper denture. Hence without any  documentary evidence we cannot come to the conclusion that the opposite parties unnecessarily removed the 4 remaining teeth of the complainant which results his illness and also we cannot asses the strength of the gums of the complainant with out experts evidence. Hence the complainant failed to prove his case that there is deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties. Hence the complaint is dismissed.

                   In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No Costs.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Forum this the 21^st day of February, 2019.

                                                                                                                                                                                           

    Lady Member                                                                                                 President (FAC)

C.C.No.36/2018

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

Witnesses Examined on behalf of Complainant/s.

 

PW-1:  B. Gopal (Chief Affidavit filed).

 

Witnesses Examined on behalf of Opposite PartY/S.

 

RW-1:  Kalyan (Chief Affidavit filed).

RW-1:  K. Partha Sarathi (Chief Affidavit filed).

 

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT/s

 

Exhibits (Ex.A)	Description of Documents
	System generated payment receipt for Rs. 150/- of Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd, Tirupati. Dt: 11.06.2016 issued by 1st opposite party.
	System generated payment receipt for Rs. 400/- of Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd, Tirupati. Dt: 12.06.2016 issued by 2nd opposite party.
	System generated payment receipt for Rs. 5000/-of Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd, Tirupati. Dt: 14.06.2016 issued by 2nd  opposite party hospital.
	System generated payment receipt for Rs. 5000/-of Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd, Tirupati. Dt: 14.06.2016 issued by 2nd opposite party.
	System generated payment receipt for Rs. 5000/-of Partha Dental Care India PVT Ltd, Tirupati. Dt: 14.06.2016 issued by 2nd opposite party hospital.
	Legal Notice. Dt: 22.12.2017 filed by the complainant along with Ack. Due.
	Reply Notice. Dt: 14.02.2018 filed by the complainant.
	Original copy of Prescription of Vijaya Hospital, Dt: 22.03.2018.
	Original copy of Medical Bill issued by Jagathi Multi Specialty Dental Hospital & Implant Centre, Tirupati, Dt: 20.12.2017.
	Original copy of Medical Bill for Rs.100/- issued by Vijaya Hospital, Chennai. Dt: 02.03.2018.
	Original copy of Medical Bill for Rs.300/- issued by Vijaya Hospital, Chennai. Dt: 02.03.2018.
	Original copy of Medical Receipt bearing No.3949 issued by Vijaya Hospital, Chennai, in favour of complainant. Dt: 13.03.2018.

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY/s

 

-NIL-

 

 

                                                                                                   President (FAC)

 

Copies to:  1) The Complainant, 

                  2) The Opposite parties.

// BY ORDER //

 

 

Head Clerk/Sheristadar,

            Dist. Consumer Forum-II, Tirupati.