Haryana

Sonipat

CC/222/2016

Naresh Kumar S/o Baljit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Nidan Hospital - Opp.Party(s)

Inderjeet Khokhar

20 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

 

                                Complaint No.222 of 2016                                              Instituted on:17.06.2016

                                Date of order:20.12.2016

 

Naresh Kumar son of Baljit Singh, resident of RK Colony, GT road, Murthal, Distt. Sonepat.

…Complainant.         

Versus

 

1.Nidan Hospital, Murthal road, Sonepat through its Director Dr Bharti Batra.

2.Distt. Registrar Birth & Death cum Civil Surgeon, Sonepat.

3.Asstt. Registrar, Birth and Death, Municipal Corp. Sonepat.

 

                                                     …Respondents.

 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. Inderjit Khokhar Advocate for complainant.

           Sh. RD Sharma   Advocate for respondent no.1.

           Sh. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent no.2 and 3.

 

Before-    Nagender Singh-President.

Prabha Wati-Member.

J.L. Gupta-Member.

 

O R D E R

 

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that his wife Darshana Kumari was admitted in the hospital of respondent no.1 on 30.6.2015 for delivery. A female child was born on 1.7.2015 at about 3.46 pm and entry of the same was duly entered in the register of the respondent no.1.  The complainant had visited the office of the respondent no.3 for obtaining the birth certificate of her newly born child namely Kirti Bhoria and lastly on 13.6.2016, the complainant was astonished to know that there was no entry in the register of the respondent no.3 regarding date of birth of the said minor child.  The respondent no.3 has asked the complainant to bring the registration number of the respondent no.1.  The complainant visited the respondent no.1 for obtaining the registration number, but he has not given the satisfactory reply and they told that they had not sent the concerned record to the respondent no.3.  Due to the act and conduct of the respondents, the daughter of the complainant has deprived off from taking the benefit under the scheme Ladli etc. launched by Haryana Govt. and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

 

2.        The respondents appeared and they filed their separate written statement.

 

          The respondent no.1 has submitted that the wife of the complainant was admitted on 1.7.2015 and was discharged on 8.7.2015. From the very beginning, the entry of newly born babies are got recorded in the office of Sub Registrar Birth/Death MC Sonepat.  Even Adhaar card of newly born babies are also prepared and issued to the parents.  The parents of the newly born babies used to submit the documents of their I.D. proof.  The respondent no.1 had sent all the documents to the office of Sub Registrar, Birth and Death, Municipal Corp. Sonepat for making entry of birth of newly born baby of the complainant who was born on 1.7.2015.  But the complainant has not submitted the document of his ID as a result of which, Adhaar card could not be issued and without issuing Adhaar card, the entry of newly born baby could not be entered in the computer online.  The complainant himself is liable and responsible for his own act & conduct and the respondent no.1 is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

 

          The respondent no.2 and 3 in their written statement has submitted that they are not guilty in any manner. The necessary registration of birth event was done vide registration no.D-7874 dated 28.9.2016 of the child of the complainant.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondents no.2 and 3.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties at length.  All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.

 

          Ld. counsel for the complainant has submitted that the wife of the complainant namely Darshana Kumari was admitted in the hospital of respondent no.1 on 30.6.2015 for delivery. A female child was born on 1.7.2015 at about 3.46 pm and entry of the same was duly entered in the register of the respondent no.1.  The complainant had visited the office of the respondent no.3 for obtaining the birth certificate of her newly born child namely Kirti Bhoria and lastly on 13.6.2016, the complainant was astonished to know that there was no entry in the register of the respondent no.3 regarding date of birth of the said minor child.  The respondent no.3 has asked the complainant to bring the registration number of the respondent no.1.  The complainant visited the respondent no.1 for obtaining the registration number, but he has not given the satisfactory reply and they told that they had not sent the concerned record to the respondent no.3.  Due to the act and conduct of the respondents, the daughter of the complainant has deprived off from taking the benefit under the scheme Ladli etc. launched by Haryana Govt. and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1 has submitted that the wife of the complainant was admitted on 1.7.2015 and was discharged on 8.7.2015. From the very beginning, the entry of newly born babies are got recorded in the office of Sub Registrar Birth/Death MC Sonepat.  Even Adhaar card of newly born babies are also prepared and issued to the parents.  The parents of the newly born babies used to submit the documents of their I.D. proof.  The respondent no.1 had sent all the documents to the office of Sub Registrar, Birth and Death, Municipal Corp. Sonepat for making entry of birth of newly born baby of the complainant who was born on 1.7.2015.  But the complainant has not submitted the document of his ID as a result of which, Adhaar card could not be issued and without issuing Adhaar card, the entry of newly born baby could not be entered in the computer online.  The complainant himself is liable and responsible for his own act & conduct and the respondent no.1 is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.2 and 3 has submitted that they are not guilty in any manner. The necessary registration of birth event was done vide registration no.D-7874 dated 28.9.2016 of the child of the complainant.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondents no.2 and 3.

 

          We find force in the contentions raised by ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1.  In our view, the complainant himself is liable for his own acts and deeds. To prove the conduct of the complainant, the respondent no.1 has placed on record the details of entry register.   The person who submitted the ID proof etc. their names were sent to Municipal Committee/Corporation, Sonepat. 

          But as far as the complainant is concerned, the complainant has not submitted his ID proof etc. and if there is any delay, the same has occurred due to the act and conduct of the complainant himself.  The respondent no.1 cannot be held responsible in any manner.  Thus, the complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation.  The present complaint is devoid of any merit and thus, the same stands dismissed with no order as to costs.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)(J.L.Gupta)                   (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF  Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:20.12.2016