BEFORE THE BANGALORE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE -  27.

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.245/2022

DATED ON THIS THE 27^th FEBRUARY-2023

Present:        1) Sri. B.Narayanappa

M.A., LL.B., - PRESIDENT  

                     2) Smt. Sharavathi. S.M,

                                               BA., LLB., MEMBER

ORDER’s pronounced by Smt. SHARAVATHI. S.M,

                                                               MEMBER

1. This Complaint is filed U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying this Commission to direct the Opposite parties to reimburse Rs.1,58,329/- payment made by the complainant and towards damages of Rs.1,00,000/- for the inconvenience and mental agony pain and suffering and to pay Rs.50,000/- of cost of litigation  and for other reliefs as the Commission deems fit under the circumstances.

2.    The brief facts of the complaint are that:

The complainant submit that she had visited for her skin and hair treatment of the Praba’s Health Care Limited complainant had small pimples on her face she seen few advertisements of the OP and booked on appointment and visited the clinic on 24/12/2021 at the time of visit filed a form for paying consultation fee the sum of Rs.650/- the same day registered for skin treatment by paying a sum of Rs.54,686/- after starting the treatment OP promised 100% cure the problem within 2 and 3 months. the OP explained about the treatment about the procedure that it is of 10 visits, wherein it will segregate into 10 sitting under mandate supervision of their costing     Rs.1,03,633/- the OP have offered the said treatment discount on upfront because she has stepped in on the day of their anniversary. Thus the complainant after having comprehensive discussion with the OP and assurances made by one Aishwarya Gowda she was convinced and decided to undergo the treatment suggested by the OP. Believing the words of the OP, the complainant has registered himself with the OP, with an initial amount of Rs.1,58,329/- on  24/12/2021  by using credit card further the complainant submits that the opposite party started giving treatment under client Identification No VSBW21120020 on 24/12/2021 and another SBW21120056 on 24/12/2021. The complainant further submits that he was on regularly treatment (according to schedule fixed by the OP and her tram) wherein she was operated on her face and head and followed all the instructions given by the OP, and was under strict maintenance in terms of food, care etc., as did all whatever it takes for her to do with the great hope of fulfillment and as same was guaranteed by the Opposite party. But she was at utter surprise as she being treated by various persons who introduced themselves as physicians and claim to be specialist for the treatment complainant was undergoing. The complainant submit that she has drastic experience as she was terribly suffered pain at various levels and had sleepless nights as scalp used to burn severely constantly  long time together and the same is still being suffered by the complainant.  The complainant got devastated when she found no miniature of improvement even after 7 sittings consistently, further examined with said effects, consequently lead to more pimples and more hair fall. The  complainant perceived that she is being cheated and  decided to deter herself from the treatment before it causes further numerous ill effect to his health and pain and sufferings. She was gone through direct mental trauma and enormous physical pain and the promises were turned to be false. It is clearly shows that the OP fake the promises, inflicting pain on her mentally and physically, in the  several request OP not refund the amount paid by the Complainant  in the earlier stage, OP assured to provide good service and after receiving the money refused to provide the same and also refuse to refund the collected amount which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade service. Hence prayed the Commission to allow the complaint as prayed.

3.    Upon the service of notice OP served as per postal acknowledgement. OP not present before the Commission, hence placed ex-party.

4.    In order to prove the case, Complainant examined herself by filing affidavit evidence and produced documents. OP has not come forward to adduce the evidence. And were set ex-parte. Arguments Heard. The following points arise for our consideration:-

1. Whether the Complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

5.    Our answer to the above points are:-

         POINT NO 1: In the Affirmative

         POINT NO 2: Partly in the Affirmative

                               for the following:

                                   REASONS

POINT NO 1:-

6.    It is the contention of the Complainant that she has visited the Opposite party for the skin and hair treatment, when she met Ms.Ashwarya Gowda has approached her and suggested hair and skin treatments. After receiving assurances from the op complainant hope that good result. She booked appointment on 24/12/2021 the same day the complainant paid sum of Rs.54,686/- the type of skin treatment are 1. Sali peel- 6 sections 2. Stem cell Acne Therapy-6sections 3. Hydration Therapy-6 sections and also type of hair treatment are 1.biocell-6sections 2.scalp maintenance-6 sections PRP treatment 4 sections all total 6 treatment and also same period  skin and hair treatment state together. The OP offered the Complainant was also made to avail EMI for 10 months for skin from SAIROHINI BANK  by the OP. In this bank the complainant paid advance amount 17,909 for two months EMI it is noticed from Ex-p4 and EX-P9  the complainant paid total of sum of Rs.1,58,329/- as per the hair and skin treatment expenses. therefore it is admitted by the complainant there is no us by the treatment lot of damages shows as per the Ex-P10 as per the photographs she was not getting any improvement from the treatment instead. The above skin and hair treatment subsequently even after 6 sittings the complainant did not get expected result. It is clearly shows she having severe headaches and more pimples on her face and other health issues, so she requested the OP to refund the amount paid by her. When OP failed to refund the amount, the complainant filed present Complaint. Along with the written arguments the complainant has  filed the National Guidelines for stem cell Research and Therapy, issued by the Government of India, ministry of Health and Family Welfare, wherein it is clearly mentioned that” at present there are no approved indications for stem cell therapy other than the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hemato logical disorders accordingly all stem cell therapy other than the above shall be treated as investigational and conducted only in the form of a clinical trail after obtaining necessary regulatory approvals, use of stem cell for any other purpose outside the domain of clinical trials will be considered unethical and hence is not permissible”.

7.    In the present case unfortunately, the  Op failed to refund the amount, even though the said treatment yielded no result to the Complainant and even when there is specific Guidelines issued by the Governments of India, ministry of health and family welfare, use of stem cells therapy for any other purpose outside the domain of the clinical trials will be considered as unethical and hence is not permissible, but the OP continued therapy, tried to exploit the complainant by taking heavy amount with false promises, therefore, we are the opinion and considered view that the OP not only committed deficiency  of service but also indulged to unfair trade practice, Accordingly, POINT NO 1 IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

POINT NO 2:-    

8.    In view of our findings on point no 1 Complainant is entitled for a reasonable compensation, since she was put to mental agony and harassment under the false promises that she will get complete the skin and hair treatment. In our view Rs.25,000/- compensation is adequately sufficient to met. Hence we answer POINT NO 2 PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ORDER

1. The complaint is allowed in part of cost.

2. The OP is liable to refund the amount of Rs.1,28,329/- excluding CGST/IG and SGST approximately with interest at 10% p.a. from 24/12/2021 (i.e., Date of payment of amount) till realization.

3. OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards compensation and sum of Rs.5,000/- cost of litigation.

4. The OP is hereby directed to desist from the unethical and unfair trade practice.

5. The OP is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this Commission within 15 days thereafter.

6. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by him, corrected by us and then pronounced in open Commission on this the 27^th February 2023)