Tamil Nadu
South Chennai
CC/24/2022
D. Anithamani, - Complainant(s)
Versus
M/s. Velachery K.S Hospital, Rep. by its Managing Director Dr. K. Balakumari, - Opp.Party(s)
M/s. Ashok Kumar
28 Apr 2023
ORDER
Date of Complaint Filed: 10.11.2021
Date of Reservation : 06.04.2023
Date of Order : 28.04.2023
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.
PRESENT: TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L., : PRESIDENT
THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L., : MEMBER I
THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA., : MEMBER II
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.24/2022
FRIDAY,THE 28th DAY OF APRIL 2023
D.Anithamani, (F/35 years)
D/o. Deivasigamani,
No.31/20, NSK 1st Street,
Nehru Nagar,
Velachery,
Chennai 600 042. …Complainant.
..Vs..
1. M/s. Velachery K.S. Hospital,
Rep by its Managing Director,
Dr.K.Balakumari,
No.14, 10th Cross Street,
AGS Colony,
Velachery
Chennai 600 042.
2. Dr.Nellai Kumar,
Senior Civil Surgeon,
Velachery K.S. Hospital,
No.14, 10th Cross Street,
AGS Colony,
Velachery
Chennai 600 042. .. Opposite Parties.
* * * * *
Counsel for the Complainant : M/s.D.Ashok Kumar, S.Mohamed Ali
& T.Suvalakshmi, Advs.,
Counsel for Opposite Parties 1 & 2: Mr.M.V.Swarrop, H.S.Hredai,
S.Gayathri, N.Mrinalini & Madhunika,,
On perusal of records and upon hearing the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant and the Counsel for the Opposite Parties, we delivered the following:
ORDER
Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,
(i) The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and prays to direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- for deficiency and negligence service on the part of the Opposite Parties along with medical expenses of Rs.10,417/- met out by the Complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for the physical and mental agony and severe hardship caused to the Complainant by the Opposite Parties, along with Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses.
I. The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-
1. The Complainant submitted that the 1st Opposite Party is running a hospital in the name and style of “VelaheryK.S.Hospital and she is the Managing Director cum Consultant Obstetrician & Gynaecologist of the said Hospital. The 2nd Opposite Party is one of the Doctor working under 1st Opposite Party.
2. The Complainant states that she got married on 13.2.2013 and delivered a male child on 24.5.2015. Thereafter, she got conceived after 6 years and went for a medical checkup on 21.7.2021 at Athani Hospital, Palakad District, Kerala, which confirmed her pregnancy after blood and urine test. Further on 22.7.2021 a scan was done in the same hospital, confirmed her pregnancy.
3. The Complainant submitted that her mother and father are living in Velachery and she decided to come and stay at her mother’s house at Velachery. On 21.8.2021, the 3rd month scan was done at Chennai Women’s Clinic at T.Nagar and she was informed that the child was normal.
4. The Complainant submitted that on 6.9.2021, she approached the 1st Opposite Party with all the reports and she was attended by one Dr.Saradha and she prescribed some vitamin tablets and tablets for vaginal infection and the said Dr.Saradha asked the Complainant to take complete blood count test and other tests and the same was done at Dhanalakshmi clinical lab attached to the 1st Opposite Party. The report was given to her on 8.9.2021.
5. The Complainant submitted that on 8.9.2021, she was experiencing severe body pain and had mild shivering and she went to 1st Opposite Party’s hospital on 8.9.2021 at 9.30 a.m. and met Dr.Saradha at about 10.00 a.m. The Complainant further submitted that the said Dr.Saradha examining and scanning the Complainant said that the foetus has good growth and thereafter she referred the Complainant to 2nd Opposite Party for shivering problems. The Complainant submitted that the 2nd Opposite Party prescribed ”Dolowin plus” tablets along with 2 other tablets namely “Mahacef-XL” and “Montral. As per advice of 2nd Opposite Party, the Complainant purchased the above said tablets from the medical shops attached with the 1st Opposite Party and took the same as prescribed by 2nd Opposite Party.
6. The Complainant submitted that on 11.9.2021 late night, she experienced mild pain in her lower abdomen and mild bleeding, and the pain started increasing as the time passes and at left with no option, at about 3.00 a.m., on 12.9.2021, she made a call to the 1st Opposite Party’s number 9962022522 and one of the staff, who answered the call said that there was no doctors available and asked her to come at 8.00 a.m The Complainant submitted that she chose 1st Opposite Party and consulted 1st and 2nd Opposite Party since the hospital proclaimed that it was having 24 hours service. But to the shock and surprise of the Complainant, when she wanted an emergency medical care, she was told that there was no doctors and was asked to come at 8.00 a.m. It is clearly shows the negligence and deficiency of service of 1st Opposite Party.
7. The Complainant submitted that her pain was increasing and left with no other option, went to nearby Pransanth Hospital, Velchery at about 3.20 a.m. and there she was given medicines by name “Trapic 500 mg” and Paracip 1 mg” for continuous pain and bleeding and the Complainant wanted to consultant 1st Opposite Party, since they were treating her and therefore on her request, she discharged from the Prasanth Hospital.
8. The Complainant submitted that abdomen pain did not stop and therefore she again made a call to the 1st Opposite Party hospital at about 7.00 a.m. on 12.9.2021 and she was told to come to 1st Opposite Party hospital. The Complainant submitted that she arrived 1st Opposite Party’s hospital at about 7.20 a.m. The staff in the hospital told the Complainant that there was no doctor to attend the Complainant as 1st Opposite Party was in the labour ward. The Complainant submitted that she was having severe and unbearable pain and was crying uncontrollably as there were no doctors to attend her. One of the staff nurse of the 1st Opposite Party, after getting instruction from 1st Opposite Party gave her “Trapic” injection and there was no doctor to attend the Complainant in her emergency.
9. The Complainant submitted that after some time she expelled the foetus in the toilet at the 1st Opposite Party’s Hospital. The Complainant submitted that she felt that she had lost everything, because 6 year after her first child she got pregnancy and her happy occasion was shot lived and she was mentally and physically dramatized and the Complainant’s happiness on the 2nd pregnancy ended in grief because of medical negligence and deficiency of service of the Opposite Parties.
10. The Complainant stated that due to incomplete abortion, on the same day she was treated and discharged at about 3.00 p.m. The Complainant further states that they have collected a sum of Rs.6900/- towards operations charges and Rs.3517/- for medicine expenses from the Complainant.
11. On consultation with other Doctors, they stated that the tablet “Dolowin plus” given by the 2nd Opposite Party is not advisable during pregnancy. Thereafter, the Complainant also studied and seared on the aspect and she has also found that the “Dolowin plus” is not advisable during pregnancy. Due to the medical negligence of the Opposite Parties, Complainant had lost her 2nd baby and the same is put the Complainant in mental agony and irreparable loss and damage. Hence the complaint.
II. Written Version Of Opposite Parties 1 & 2 are in breif:
12. The Opposite Party submitted that the contention that the Complainant was experiencing mild pain in her abdomen and bleeding on 11.9.2021 is admitted. It is submitted that one Dr.Maragathamani was on duty from 9.00 p.m on 11.9.2021 to 9.00 a.m. on 12.9.2021. However, when the Complainant called the hospital at 3.00 a.m. On 12.09.2021 Dr. Maragathamani was carrying out an emergency caesarean operation. Hence she was not available to answer the aforementioned call. The 1st Opposite Party’s operation Theater Register also reflects the fact that Dr.Maragathamani was engaged in a surgery between 2.00 p.m. to 3.00 a.m. on 12.9.2021. It is also pertinent to note that the Complainant was informed of the fact that Dr.Maragathamani was on the premises of the Hospital attending to a medical emergency by the concerned nurse.
13. It is pertinent to note that the Complainant was given medicines by the name of “Trapic 500 mg” and Paracip 1 mg” at Prashant Hospital. Therefore, in this context, it is submitted that the Complainant did not merely consume the tablets prescribed by the 2nd Opposite Party.
14. It is submitted that as of 7.00 am on 12.09.2021, Dr.Maragathamani was on duty and was attending the needs of a patient in the labour ward. Further more, when there is more that one patient requiring doctor’s assistance, then the doctor will have to attend to the needs of the one in the direst circumstances.
15. It is extremely unfortunate that the Complainant had to undergo the trauma of losing a child. However, he tragic loss was not an account of any medical negligence or deficiency of services on behalf of the Opposite Parties. It is submitted that the cause of a miscarriage is extremely difficult to determine. The Complainant had a euploid abortion. That euploid abortions take place at around the 13th week of pregnancy. Furthermore, the chances of euploid abortions increases drastically after 35 years. The Complainant is 35 years old. In addition to this, she was also suffering from a fever and body pain prior to her incomplete abortion, indicating the existence of an infection. It is submitted that any infection and associated fever can also induce an abortion. Therefore, the Complainant’s incomplete abortion could have also occurred as a result of the basic nature of the illness that had affected her.
16. The Complainant incorrectly stated that the negligence of the Opposite Party is the reason behind the loss of her child. it is submitted that Dolowin plus is a tablet containing Acelofenac and Paracetamol. It isessentially a Non steroidal Antí-Inflammatory Drug (NSAIDs ). There has been no study which is indicative of the fact that such NSAIDs are known to cause abortions. However, such drugs are usually avoided in the first three monthsof pregnancy on account of the fact that any drug can produce teratogenicity. Further more, it is also pertinent to note that most drugs are not tested on pregnant women due to the significant ethical considerations involved.
17. The Complainant was in her 2nd trimester when she was prescribed Dolowinplus. A doctor can prescribe Dolowin plus to pregnant women in their second trimester if the benefits of consuming the drug outweigh the side effects.
18. It is submittedthat Dr. K Balakumari (the authorized representative of the 1st Opposite Party) told the Complainant and her parents that Dolowin plus does not have been the first choice of drug for a pregnant woman. Furthermore Dr.K.Balakumari, also reassured the Complainant and her parents of the fact that Dolowin plus does not cause abortions. It is reiterated that any person with a fever or an infection faces the risk of an abortion /miscarriage. Dr.Balakumari merely highlighted the fact that Dolowin plus is not the first choice of drug for pregnant women. Such a statement cannot be taken to be an admission to the effect that the aforementioned drug causes abortions.
19. There is no doubt about the fact that the Complainant has undergone a tremendous about of trauma on account of undergoing an abortion and losing child. However, she had already been suffering from basic illnesses such as fever, body pain and infection even before she came to the Opposite Parties, who had assisted her to the best of their abilities despite the prevailing dire circumstances. It is submitted that a severe infection, accompanied by fever and body pain, can cause an abortion. Especially in the case of a woman who is over the age of 35. Hence, the Opposite Parties cannot be held liable in any manner whatsoever for either medical negligence or deficiency of service. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.
III. The Complainant has filed his proof affidavit, in support of his claim in the complaint and has filed 27 documents which are marked as Ex.A-1 to A-27. The Opposite Parties have submitted their proof affidavit, Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-9 documents were marked on their side. Both side written argument filed.
IV. Points for Consideration:-
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?
3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?
POINT NO. 1 :-
20. The contention of the Complainant is that six years after the first child was born she once again got conceived which was confirmed on 21.07.2021. Thereafter on 06.09.2021 she had approached the 1st Opposite Party, who had prescribed tablets and various tests which was done at the Dhanlakshimi Clinical Lab. On 08.09.2021 as she had body pain and mild shivering she went to the 1st Opposite Party where the 2nd Opposite Party prescribed ”Dolowin plus” tablets and other two tablets, which the Complainant consumed as per the advice of the 2nd Opposite Party. On 11.09.2021 she had mild pain in the lower abdomen and mild bleeding and hence had made a call to the 1st Opposite Party who informed that there was no doctor available and asked her to come at 8.00 a.m. The Complainant with no other option went to near by Prashanth Hospital, Velacherry at about 3.20 a.m and there she was given medicines, since she wanted to consult the 1st Opposite Party she got discharged from the Prashanth Hospital and arrived to the 1st Opposite Party at about 7.20 a.m, where she was informed that there was no doctor to attend the Complainant as the 1st Opposite Party was in a labour ward. One of the staff nurse gave her “Trapic” Injection and after some time she expelled foetus in the toilet at the 1st Opposite Party Hospital which is due to the negligence and deficiency of service of the Opposite Parties.
21. The Opposite Parties admitted that the Complainant was experiencing mild pain in her abdomen and bleeding on 11.09.2021. From 9.00 p.m on 11.09.2021to 9.00 a.m on 12.09.2021, Dr. Maragathamani was in duty and at 3.00 a.m on 12.09.2021 she was engaged in a surgery and as of 7.00 a.m on 12.09.2021 she was in duty attending the needs of patients in the labour ward. Hence on 12.09.2021 the Complainant was attended by one of the experienced staff nurse who administered “Trapic” injection. It was further contented that the chances of Euploid abortions increases after the 35 years. In addition the Complainant was suffering from fever and body pain prior to the incomplete abortion indicating the existence of an infection, which can also induce abortion. Further contended that Dolowin Tablets went administered in 2nd trimester are not known to cause abortions.Further more even as per the admission made by the Complainant she had consumed the drugs prescribed by one Prashanth Hospital before visiting the 1st Opposite Party, which incident breaks any causation link between the Complainant consuming the tablets prescribed by the 2nd Opposite Party and her eventual abortion.
22. The Complainant had approached the 1st Opposite Party on 06.09.2021 who prescribed tablets and the same was purchased by the Complainant as seen from Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-3and various tests the Complainant had also taken various test at the Dhanklakshmi Clinical Lab attached to the 1st Opposite Party on the advice of the 1st Opposite Party as per Ex.A-2, Ex.A-4, Ex.A-5. As per Ex.A-9 the Complainant has got infection for which the 2nd Opposite Party had prescribed “Dolowin” tablets. According to the Complainant Dolowin tablets was not advisable during pregnancy by relying upon Ex.A-3. The Opposite Party countered that Dolowin Plus is a tablet containing Acelofenac and Paracetamol, which is essentially a Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflamatory Drug (NSAIDs). There has been no study to indicate that such NSAIDs are known to cause abortions. However such drugs are usually avoided in the first 3 months of pregnancy.
23. In support of the contentions on the medication namely “Dolowin Plus” the Opposite Parties relied on reports of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist, Ex.B-2 which states that the risk of miscarriage is increased by 20% at the age of 30. As per Ex.B-3, the Medical Text Book namely“Gabbes Obstetrics, Normal and Problem Pregnancies”, it is stated that Acetaminophen is generally a safe option of any gestation age, whereas Non Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflamatory Drugs may be considered for a short course (< 72 hours) in women at less than 32 weeks of gestation without renal impairment. Ex.B-4, the Journal Article published in the “Official Publication of the college of Family Physicians of Canada” titled Treating Pain during Pregnancy has held that Acetaminophen like Dolowin Plus are not known to cause abortions. The Opposite Parties had also produced an article published in “Hindawi” titled “Pain Management in Pregnancy: Multimodal Approaches” classifying Acetaminophen under category B which states that there are no controlled studies in women indicating an adverse effect that was not confirmed in controlled studies in women in the 1st Trimester and there is no evidence of risk in the later trimesters. Further as per Ex.B-6, reports from the CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on “Flu & Pregnancy” it was held that seasonal flus are likely to be harmful for developing babies.
24. The Complainant had made representation dated 18.10.2021 to the Ministry of Health and Welfare and other Authorities vide Ex.A-17 pursuant to which, the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu by letter dated 15.11.2021, Ex.A-22 had directed the Director of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy to take necessary action. Further the Complainant had also received a letter dated 17.11.2021, Ex.A-23 from the National Medical Commission, Ethics and Medical Registration Board to approach the Tamil Nadu Medical Council on 22.11.2021. The Tamil Nadu Medical Council had directed the Complainant to produce proof / evidence, materials, documents records, case sheets for further actions within 15 days, for which the Complainant by reply dated 26.11.2021 had submitted the documents sought for by the Tamil Nadu Medical Council. Further the Tamil Nadu Medical Council directed the Opposite Parties vide Ex.A-27 and Ex.A-28 to submit explanation for the complaint referred by the Complainant. The 1st Opposite Party on receipt of notice dated 30.11.2021, Ex.B-7 from Tamil Nadu Medical Council has issued a reply dated 11.12.2021, Ex.B-8 stating that nothing untoward, negligent or ethically wrong happened in the actions taken by the Opposite Parties.
25. The Tamil Nadu Medical Council by its order dated 03.10.2022 based on the complaint made by the Complainant and on the explanations received from the Opposite Parties upon hearing the Complainant and the Opposite Parties and on perusal of the documents submitted had dropped the case against the Opposite Parties since there was no proof for unethical and negligent act on the part of the Opposite Parties.
26. The Opposite Parties relied on the order of the Hon’ble National Commission in O.P.No.226 of 1992 decided on 19.03.2002 wherein it was held that “As for the hospital, regarding non-availability of ICU facilities, if there is no vacancy in the unit and that is why he could not be shifted, this is not considered to be deficiency of service” which is applicable to the case at hand as the contention of the Complainant that no doctor was available is negatived as the Opposite Party doctor was very much available but was performing emergency surgery in the labour ward and hence the Complainant was under the supervision of the staff nurse.
27. Further the Opposite Parties relied upon another order of the Hon’ble National Commission passed on 13.12.2006 in Nehru Hospital Vs Bhiwani Dutt and others wherein it was held that no expert opinion has been led by the Complainant in support of its contention that the Ulnar nerve damage was caused by the procedure or by administration of glucose on his left hand and that no specific evidence was brought in to prove that the action of the Opposite Parties resulted in damage to the nerve, which is also applicable to the present case as the Complainant failed to prove by expert evidence that the tablet Dolowin Plus prescribed by the Opposite Parties and that the action of Opposite Parties had caused abortion.
28. On the discussions made above and on careful perusal of the documents marked as Exhibits on both sides and considering the submissions made by the Counsel for Complainant and Opposite Parties it is clear that the Complainant had approached the Opposite Parties after becoming pregnant. As she experienced pain and shivering she had approached the Opposite Parties who prescribed Dolowin Plus, which according to the Complainant is not advisable during pregnancy in support of which the Complainant relied upon Ex.A-13 which is the printout from the internet which states that Dolowin Plus is not safe for use in women who are pregnant. However a further reading of the same would show that Dolowin Plus can be used during the first 26 weeks of pregnancy if its benefit to the mother justifies the risk to the baby. Further the Opposite Parties had produced various Medical literatures showing that Dolowin Plus does not cause abortion.
29. As regards the contention of the non availability of doctors in the 1st Opposite Party, when the 1st Opposite Party proclaimed itself for 24 hours service, and when the Complainant had an emergency medical care there was no doctor, the Opposite Parties had produced Ex.B-1 which is the operation theatre register maintained by the 1st Opposite Party showing that Doctor Maragathamani was available from 9.00 p.m on 11.9.2021 to 9.00 a.m. on 12.9.2021. However when the Complainant called the hospital at 3.00 a.m. On 12.09.2021 Dr. Maragathamani was carrying out an emergency caesarean operation. Ex.B-1, operation Theater Register also reflects the fact that Dr.Maragathamani was engaged in a surgery at that time on 12.9.2021. Further around 7.00 a.m on 12.09.2021 she was in the labour ward. Hence the contention of the Complainant that there was no doctor on the particular date when she had medical emergency is negatived and as the doctor was in labour ward she was attended and supervised by a staff nurse.
30. Further as the Complainant failed to prove that Dolowin Plus tablet which was prescribed by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant was direct cause for her abortion and as there is no material evidence to show that the Opposite Parties had committed any negligence or deficiency of service on their part this Commission is of the considered view that there is no negligence or deficiency committed by the Opposite Parties.
Point No.2 and 3:
31. As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint and hence not entitled for any other relief/s. Accordingly Point NoS. 2 and 3 are answered.
In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 28th of April 2023.
S. NANDAGOPALAN T.R. SIVAKUMHAR B.JIJAA
MEMBER II MEMBER I PRESIDENT
List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-
Ex.A1 | 06.09.2021 | Prescription issued by the 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A2 | 06.09.2021 | Bills for test report issued by the 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A3 | 06.09.2021 | Pharmacy bill receipt issued by nagas Pharmacy attached with 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A4 | 06.09.2021 | Receipt issued by the Dhanalakshmi clinical lab attached with 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A5 | 06.09.2021 | Test Report |
Ex.A6 | 08.09.2021 | Prescription issued by the 2nd Opposite Party |
Ex.A7 | 08.09.2021 | Prescription issued by the 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A8 | 08.09.2021 | Pharmacy bill receipt issued by Nagas Pharmacy attached with 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A9 | 08.09.2021 | Complete blood count report issued by the Dhanalakshmi clinical lab attached with 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A10 | 12.09.2021 | IP summary bill and its receipt for Rs.6900/- issued by the 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A11 | 12.09.2021 | Pharmacy bill receipt issued by Nagas Pharmacy attached with 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A12 | 12.09.2021 | Discharge summary issued by the 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.A13 |
| A details getting from the website regarding “Dolowin Plus” |
Ex.A14 | 18.10.2021 | A legal notice issued on behalf of the Complainant |
Ex.A15 | 18.10.2021 | Postal receipts |
Ex.A16 |
| Acknowledgement cards |
Ex.A17 | 18.10.2021 | A complaint sent by the Complainant to the concern authorities |
Ex.A18 | 18.10.2021 | Postal receipts |
Ex.A19 |
| Acknowledgment cards |
Ex.A20 |
| Aadhar card of the Complainant |
Ex.A21 |
| Reply Notice issued by the Opposite Parties |
Ex.A22 | 15.11.2021 | A communication sent from the Health & Family welfare Dept. & the Tamilnadu Medical council |
Ex.A23 | 17.11.2021 | A communication received from the MCI |
Ex.A24 | 22.11.2021 | A communication received from the TN Medical Council |
Ex.A25 | 26.11.2021 | A Representation send by the Complainant to the Tamilnadu Medical Council along with documents |
Ex.A26 | 26.11.2021 | Postal Receipts |
Ex.A26 | 30.11.2021 | A Memorandum issued by the TN Medical Council to the Opposite Parties |
List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-
Ex.B1 |
| Operation the ater register of the 1st Opposite Party |
Ex.B2 |
| The “Information for you” page of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, covering the issue of Early Miscarriage |
Ex.B3 |
| Page 860 in the 8th edition of the medical textbook “Gabbe’s Obstetrics Normal and problem Preganancies” |
Ex.B4 |
| Journal Article published in the “Official Publication of the College of Family Physicians of Canada” titled treating pain during pregnancy |
Ex.B5 |
| Journal Article published in the “Hindawi” titled pain Management in Pregnancy: Multimodal Approaches |
Ex.B6 |
| The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDS) report on Flu & Pregnancy |
Ex.B7 |
| Notice from the Tamil Nadu Medical Council |
Ex.B8 |
| 1st Opposite Party’s reply to the Notice from the Tamil Nadu Medical Council |
Ex.B9 |
| Order passed by the Registrar of the Tamil Nadu Medical Council |
S. NANDAGOPALAN T.R. SIVAKUMHAR B.JIJAA
MEMBER II MEMBER I PRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
Bhanu Pratap
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)
Bhanu Pratap
Featured RecomendedHighly recommended!
Experties
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Phone Number
7982270319
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.