Adv.for the complainant-. Sri R.rath

         Adv.for the O.P   - Sri  S.K.Panigrahi                                                                             

                                     Date of filing of the case:-  08.04.2016

                                                                                               Date of order                    :-  29.03.2017

JUDGMENT.

Sri A.K.Purohit, President  

 1.          The case of the complainant is that, he was under the treatment of the O.P. for the disease of acute appendicitis from 23.07.2015  to 26.07.2015 . The complainant alleges that,  he being a smart card holder under the  Rashtriya swasthya Bima Yoana, he is entitled to free treatment in a empanelled hospital, but the OP. being an empanelled hospital demanded Rs. 23,335/- for his treatment, Which is a violation of the scheme by the OP. Hence the complainant has preferred this case alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.

2          The OP. contested the case by filing his written version. The OP. denied the complainant’s allegation and submitted that, neither the complainant nor his father has produced the smart card before the OP. and hence without verification the OP. could not have assumed that the complainant is a beneficiary  of Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yoana. It is further submitted that, under the  scheme the amount spent for the treatment is reimbursed by the insurance company & hence there is no reason for denial the same by the OP,  if the  by  the complainant card is produced . Hence the OP. claims dismissal of the case.

3.     Heard both the parties . Before going into the merits of the case the learned  advocate  for the OP. raised a preliminary Objection relating to the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and submitted that, the OP. is a resident of sambalpur and the cause of action for the case arose in his hospital at sambalpur and hence this forum has no territorial Jurisdiction to decide the case.

 4      Perused the complainant petition. It is an admitted fact that, the  O.P. is a resident of  sambalpur and his hospital is situates at Laxminarayan lane, Sambalpur. The complainant petition and Xerox copy of documents filed by the complainant shows that, the complainant was treated in the OP’s hospital at sambalpur . The cause of action for the case arose when the O.P. refused to accept the smart card and demanded charges in his hospital at sambalpur. Neither the complainant petition nor the documents available on record shows that cause of action arose within the Jurisdiction of this Forum . It is submitted on behalf of the complainant that, a notice was sent by the complainant’s father to the OP. from Titilagarh for refund of money , which shows that a part of cause of action arose at Titilagarh . sending a notice or what course the complainant choose for redressal of his grievance cannot be said to be a cause of action for filing this case . The cause of action for this case arose when the OP. demanded treatment charges. Hence the material available on record shows that, the cause of action arose at sambalpur . Hence this forum has no Jurisdiction to decide the case . The complainant may approach any other Forum having Jurisdiction if so advised.

  5    Since this Forum has no Jurisdiction to decide the case , It is not necessary to discuss on the         merits if the case.

          Accordingly the case of the complainant is dismissed.

ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS The 29^th    DAY OF MARCH’2017.

    Sd/-                                                                   Sd/-                                                                                 Sd/-

(S.Rath)                                                           (G.K.Rath)                                                         (A.K.Purohit)

MEMBER.                                                         MEMBER.                                                           PRESIDENT