Delhi

StateCommission

RP/185/2016

SPORTS INJURY CENTRE & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIRMAL JOSHI - Opp.Party(s)

SHOBHANA TAKIAR

09 Aug 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

Date of argument:  09.08.2016

Date of Order: 22.08.2016

Revision Petition No.185/16In the matter of:

Sports Injury Centre,

Anthroscopy & Joint Disorder

Safdarjung Hospital,

Ring Road,

New Delhi-110029.

 

Dr. Deepak Chaudhary,

Anthroscopy & Joint Disorder

Safdarjung Hospital,

Ring Road,

New Delhi-110029.

 

Dr. Nitin Mehta,

Anthroscopy & Joint Disorder

Safdarjung Hospital,

Ring Road,

New Delhi-110029.                                                       ………….Appellants

         

Versus

 

Ms. Nirmal Joshi,

w/o. Shri J.N. Joshi,R/o. H-33 A Kalkaji,

New Delhi-110019.                                                          ….Respondent

 

CORAM

O.P. Gupta, Member (Judicial)

1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?  Yes

2.      To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes        

ORDER

The OP has challenged order dated 23.5.16 passed by district forum dismissing application under Section 26 moved by the OP for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that complainant/  respondent was not a consumer as OP was a government hospital and was providing treatment free of charge/ cost. The district forum found that receipts dated 7.7.14, 1.7.14,  2.7.14,  28.1.15 and 10.7.14 marked  A to E show payment made by complainant towards treatment of the patient. Hence, the application was dismissed.

I do not find any infirmity in the said approach of the district forum. Moreover it was held in Laxman Thmappa Kotgiri V/s. G.M. Center Railway (2007) 4 SCC 596 that government hospitals are covered under Consumer Protection Act. Same view was taken by National Commission in Parbat Kumar Mukerjee V/s. Ruby General hospital II (2005) CPJ 35 that government hospital providing free service are also covered under Consumer Protection Act.

For the foregoing reasons the appeal has not merit and is dismissed in limine. Copy of the order be sent to district forum for information. Copy of the order be sent to both the parties free of cost. 

 

                                                                                                 (O.P.GUPTA)

MEMBER (JUDICIAL)