STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                    U.T., CHANDIGARH 

1.   Deep Dental Clinic through Dr.Kuldip Singh, SCO No.250,     First & Second Floor, Sector 44-C, Chandigarh.
2.  Dr.Kuldip Singh, Proprietor/Partner, Deep Dental Clinic,    SCO No.250, First & Second Floor, Sector 44-C, Chandigarh. 

                                                                         ….Appellants

                                                   Versus

Kuldeep Singh aged 59 years, s/o Sh.Sarwan Singh, R/o H.No.440/1, Village Kajheri, Sector 52, Chandigarh.     

                                                                                               ……Respondent

                 Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986                           against  order dated 28.03.2018 passed by District Consumer                          Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U. T. Chandigarh in C.C.No.No.                            18/2018..

Argued by:  Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate for the appellants.

BEFORE:       JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT

                       MR.DEV RAJ, MEMBER

PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT

                     Appellants/Opposite parties have filed this appeal against order dated 28.03.2018, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum(II), U.T. Chandigarh (for short the Forum only),  allowing a consumer complaint filed by the respondent/complainant, ordering the appellants to refund an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant, which was paid by him to the appellants when Monolith Zirconia Bridge was implanted  in his mouth.  He was further granted litigation costs of Rs.5,000/-.  The amount awarded was ordered to be paid within a time bound manner, failing which, it was to entail penal consequences.

 2.           As per facts on record, to cure tooth problem, respondent/complainant visited the appellants. After diagnosis, the OPs decided to fix a bridge in his mouth and charged an amount of Rs.20,000/- on 20.11.2015. Tooth replacement warranty was given for five years, in case, it is damaged/broken in any manner(Annexure A-2).  It is case of the complainant that after two years, bridge came out. When he approached the OPs, they refused to replace the bridge, during warranty. 

3.             Upon notice, reply was filed. Implanting of bridge and crown over the adjoining upper molar last tooth of the complainant was admitted.  Payment was also admitted.  It was said that the warranty was given by  the Company which had made the said bridge and the crown.  It is further said that the bridge came out when the complainant was in Canada about two months before he  approached them. No attempt was made to get it re-fixed. It was further said that due to space closure, it would not be possible to re-fix the old bridge and the complainant was advised its replacement, which was refused.

4.            Both the parties led evidence. The Forum, on analysis of pleadings, documents on record, and arguments addressed, allowed the complaint, as stated above. When granting relief, the Forum observed as under;

“We have heard the ld.Counsel for the complainant, Dr.Kuldip Singh in person and have also perused the entire record.

  Dr.Kuldip Singh, Proprietor of Deep Dental Clinic admittedly in his report Ann.A-6 has installed a bridge of Zirconia Monolith (3M) of Tooth Number 15, 16, 17 and also given limited warranty of 5 years.  Furthermore, a Bite Guard was also given to prevent damage to the teeth, due to attrition. 

      Dr.Kuldip Singh has stated that the bridge installed in the replacement of tooth No.15, 16, 17 of the complainant was fallen/knocked out on the following reasons:- 

a)  Bruxism, an unconscious habit of grinding of teeth;

b)  Eating sticky food, like candies and chocolates;

                        c)  None compliance of the bite guard;

d)  Premature contacts especially when opposite arch bridge in the area of canine is given.

He has stated that the complainant now require a new Bridge with little shaping of the molar tooth (17) for which he has to pay processing charges to him.

       The complainant has got the treatment at the cost of Rs.20,000/- from the Dr.Kuldip Singh on 20.11.2015.  The bridge fixed by Dr.Kuldip Singh admittedly had 5 years warranty, which have developed hole and fallen out from the fixture of mouth of complainant.  Notwithstanding any cause advertent or inadvertent on the part of complainant, the OP Dr.Kuldip Singh was duty bound to stand to the terms & conditions as laid down in the warranty regarding bridge used by him for the treatment of the complainant. The OP Dr.Kuldip Singh personally appeared before this Forum and argued his case refuting the contentions as raised in the complaint, however, the same were not found convincible. The OP Dr.Kuldip Singh has declined to rectify the defect or install a new bridge free of cost even though under the warranty period.  He insisted for treatment only against payment by the complainant. We find merit in the contentions raised by the complainant regarding deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties in providing him service as per terms & conditions of the warranty.”

 5.             It was noticed that the bridge fixed was under 5 years warranty. It was also proved on record that the said bridge developed a hole and fallen out from the mouth of the complainant.  It was further rightly observed that there was five years warranty against damage/breakage etc. so far as the bridge is concerned and refusal on the part of the appellants/OPs not to replace the bridge within warranty was not justified. We are of the opinion that the view taken by the Forum is quite justified and needs no interference. 

6.          For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, at the preliminary stage,  with no order as to costs. The order of the District  Forum is upheld

7.              Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.

8.           The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.