Kerala

Wayanad

CC/124/2013

Shimna, W/o. Manoj Prasad, Premodalayam, kammana Post, Nalloornadu, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rosily, W/o. Krishnan Kutty, Proprietor, Jeevan Medicals, Thazeyangadi, Mananthavady Post and Villag - Opp.Party(s)

26 Nov 2014

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
CIVIL STATION ,KALPETTA
WAYANAD-673122
PHONE 04936-202755
 
Complaint Case No. CC/124/2013
 
1. Shimna, W/o. Manoj Prasad, Premodalayam, kammana Post, Nalloornadu,
Mananthavady Taluk.
Wayanad
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Rosily, W/o. Krishnan Kutty, Proprietor, Jeevan Medicals, Thazeyangadi, Mananthavady Post and Village,
Mananthavady Taluk.
Wayanad
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:

The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 for an Order directing the opposite party to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant and to pay the cost of the proceedings.

 

2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant used to consult Dr. Naseera Bhanu during her pregnancy period. The complainant after delivery got breast fungus and consulted Dr. Naseera Bhanu on 10.02.2013. The Doctor prescribed certain alloppathy medicines. The complainant and her husband went to the shop of opposite party for purchasing the medicines and purchased medicines and applied the medicines as per the prescription. The complainant's sickness increased when medicines are used. The complainant then approached the Doctor with the prescription and remaining medicines. At that time the Doctor informed the complainant that the medicines purchased by her are something different than that is prescribed. The medicines sold by opposite party are different in chemical contents than that is prescribed. The opposite party sold two different medicines which is not prescribed by the Doctor. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party had deliberately changed the medicine and sold it to the complainant. When the complainant informed the matter to the opposite party, the opposite part did not care it. The sickness of the complainant increased due to the use of the changed medicines and the complainant suffered much mental agony and financial loss. The complainant send Lawyer Notice to the opposite party on 07.05.2013 and the opposite party send reply to the complainant on 22.05.2013. The opposite party not settled the matter. Aggrieved by this the complaint is filed.

 

3. On receipt of the complaint, notice was issued to opposite party and opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version, the opposite party admitted that the complainant on 16.02.2013 purchased medicines from the shop of opposite party. The complainant purchased medicines in several occasions from the shop of opposite party prior to 16.02.2013. The complainant not stated in the complaint with regard to the details of medicines the complainant had used etc... The opposite party contented that the opposite party sold the medicines to the complainant with a direction to consult the Doctor before using the medicines. The opposite party gave the medicines to the complainant for using the medicines for two days ie on 17.02.2013 and 18.02.2013. The opposite party never sold medicines according to the whims and fancies of opposite party. The medicines sold to the complainant is only with the permission of complainant. The complainant never stated which all are the disorders happened to her due to the application of medicines. There is no deficiency of service from the part of the opposite party and opposite party is not liable to pay cost and compensation.

4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite party?

2. Relief and Cost.

5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and filed documents. The complainant is examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Ext.A1 to A10. Ext.A1 is the prescription by Dr. Naseera Bhanu. Ext.A3 is the Certificate issued by Dr. Naseera Bhanu stating that the medicines prescribed to Mrs. Shimna Manoj on 06.02.2013 had been substituted by the pharmacist. The medicines are chemically different also. The opposite party admitted in the version that the opposite party had sold the medicine to the complainant with a condition to consult the Doctor before using it. When a medical shop sold the same medicine as prescribed by the Doctor, there will be less chance to put a direction to consult the Doctor before using the medicine. So it is absolutely sure that the opposite party had substituted the

medicine and sold it to the complainant. In the cross-examination of opposite party, the opposite party stated that there was a case before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wayanad earlier with an allegation of substitution of medicine by the opposite party and the opposite party had paid the compensation as per the Order of Forum. Moreover, the opposite party admitted that Drug Inspector had taken action against the opposite party earlier with the same reason of substitution of medicines etc... The admission in the version clubbed with the statement in cross examination will reveal that the opposite party had committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.

 

6. Point No.2:- The Point No.1 is found against the opposite party, hence the opposite party is liable to pay cost and compensation to the complainant. The Point No.2 is decided accordingly.

 

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as cost of the proceedings. The opposite party shall comply the Order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest per annum for the whole amount thereafter.

 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 26th day of November 2014.

 

Date of Filing: 19.07.2013.

PRESIDENT :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

/True Copy/

 

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 

 

APPENDIX.

Witness for the complainant:

 

PW1. Shimna. Complainant.

 

PW2. Dr. Nazeera Bhanu. Consultant, District Hospital Mananthavady.

 

Witness for the Opposite Party:

 

OPW1. Rosily. Pharmacist, Mananthavady.

 

Exhibits for the complainant:

 

A1. Prescription. dt:16.02.2013.

 

A2. Medical Bill. dt:16.02.2013.

 

A3. Certificate. dt:25.02.2013.

 

A4. Copy of complaint given to Drug Inspector.

 

A5. Receipt. dt:12.03.2013.

 

A6. Copy of Lawyer Notice. dt:07.05.2013.

 

A7. Acknowledgment Card.

 

A8. Reply Notice. dt:22.05.2013.

 

A9. Prescription. dt:23.12.2013.

 

A10. Copy of Order. dt:03.07.2013.

 

 

Exhibits for the opposite Party.

 

Nil.

 

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly 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.