Charanjit Singh, President;

1        The complainant Ajit Singh has filed the present complaint under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after called   as 'the Act') against the opposite parties on the allegations that the complainant is a small businessman and is running a Karyana shop. The complainant had a problem of broken Hus i.e. the Collar bone. For the treatment of the same, the complainant approached the opposite party on 13.7.2017. The opposite party advised the complainant of a surgery called shoulder repair and demanded Rs. 30,000/- from him. The complainant paid this amount to the opposite party and was got admitted by the opposite party on 13.7.2017. The complainant was operated upon shoulder repair surgery on the same day and as per Dr. Sahil, Dr. Honey, Dr. Pannu and Dr. Rajinder, the complainant was operated and a wire with screws had been implanted in the shoulder during the surgery and the complainant was discharged by the opposite party on 14.7.2017. The complainant was advised for rest and changing of bandage after two days. The complainant acted as per the advise. The complainant took the prescription as given by the opposite party but insptie of utmost care, the complainant experienced the same problem of broken bone which could be seen with bear eye. So the complainant approached the opposite party regarding it but the opposite party told the complainant that the bone has been joined with the shoulder and the problem has been solved. The complainant was not satisfied with the answers of the opposite party and was doubtful of the treatment given to him. The complainant approached Parkash Hospital, Amritsar, where the doctor told him that the complainant has very severe infection in the portion where the surgery was conducted by the opposite party and Parkash Hospital advised operation immediately and also advised removal of the wire with screw implanted by the opposite party and told the complainant that the surgery was done by the opposite party seems to be done by in-competent doctor who has acted in negligence and acted without knowledge of such like cases and Paraksh Hospital demanded Rs. 10,50,000/- from the complainant for the surgery and also told him that the complainant had to be admitted in hospital for 10 days. The complainant also visited Ranjit Hospital Amritsar on 1.8.2017 who also advised removal of implant done by the opposite party through surgery and also demanded Rs. 1,30,000/- from him and also told to the complainant that he had to remained in the hospital for 10 days. On hearing and coming to know about the defective surgery done by the opposite party, the complainant was very much embarrassed and confused what to do about the infection and also regarding his future. The complainant is a very small business man and did not afford the new surgery and its expenses as this would result in huge financial loss to him and will also very much be loss to his small business i.e. Karyana Shop and absence of complainant from his business will result of multiplying financial crises. The complainant approached the opposite party alongwith some respectable of village for demanding compensation of Rs. 10 Lacs for conducting a wrong surgery which resulted in medical complicacies in the complainant on 2.8.2017 but the opposite party flatly refused to pay any compensation to the complainant for its negligence. Feeling dissatisfied by the act and conduct of the opposite party, the complainant perforce has filed this complaint against the opposite party. The complainant has prayed that the opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.10 Lacs as compensation to complainant for conducting wrong surgery which resultant in other medical problems and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.

2        Notice of this complaint was sent to the opposite party and the opposite party has been duly served in this case but the opposite party did not appear and consequently, the opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 26.9.2017.

3        In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. C-1 alongwith documents Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-4 and closed his evidence.

4        We have heard the complainant and have also carefully gone through the evidence and documents on the file.

5        Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that the complainant is a small businessman and is running a Karyana shop. The complainant had a problem of broken Hus i.e. the Collar bone. For the treatment of the same, the complainant approached the opposite party on 13.7.2017. The opposite party advised the complainant of a surgery called shoulder repair and demanded Rs. 30,000/- from him. The complainant paid this amount to the opposite party and was got admitted by the opposite party on 13.7.2017. The complainant was operated upon shoulder repair surgery on the same day and as per Dr. Sahil, Dr. Honey, Dr. Pannu and Dr. Rajinder, the complainant was operated and a wire with screws had been implanted in the shoulder during the surgery and the complainant was discharged by the opposite party on 14.7.2017. The prescription slip issued by the opposite party is Ex. C-4 on record. The complainant was advised for rest and changing of bandage after two days. The complainant acted as per the advise. The complainant took the prescription as given by the opposite party but insptie of utmost care, the complainant experienced the same problem of broken bone which could be seen with bear eye. It is also contended that the complainant approached the opposite party regarding it but the opposite party told the complainant that the bone has been joined with the shoulder and the problem has been solved. It is also contended that the complainant was not satisfied with the answers of the opposite party and was doubtful of the treatment given to him. The complainant approached Parkash Hospital, Amritsar, where the doctor told him that the complainant has very severe infection in the portion where the surgery was conducted by the opposite party and Parkash Hospital advised operation immediately and also advised removal of the wire with screw implanted by the opposite party and told the complainant that the surgery was done by the opposite party seems to be done by in-competent doctor who has acted in negligence and acted without knowledge of such like cases and Paraksh Hospital demanded Rs. 10,50,000/- from the complainant for the surgery and also told him that the complainant had to be in hospital for 10 days. The prescription slip of the Paraksh Hospital is ex. C-3 on the record. It is also contended by the complainant that the complainant also visited Ranjit Hospital Amritsar on 1.8.2017 who also advised removal of implant done by the opposite party through surgery and also demanded Rs. 1,30,000/- from him and also told to the complainant that he had to remained in the hospital for 10 days. The prescription slip of the Ranjit Hospital is Ex. C-2 on record. It is also contended that on hearing and coming to know about the defective surgery done by the opposite party, the complainant was very much embarrassed and confused what to do about the infection and also regarding his future. It is also contended that the complainant is a very small business man and did not afford the new surgery and its expenses as this would result in huge financial loss to him and will also very much be loss to his small business i.e. Karyana Shop. It is also contended that absence of complainant from his business will result of multiplying financial crises. The complainant approached the opposite party alongwith some respectable of village for demanding compensation of Rs. 10 Lacs for conducting a wrong surgery which resulted in medical complicacies in the complainant on 2.8.2017 but the opposite party flatly refused to pay any compensation to the complainant for its negligence.  It is also contended that this act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and prayed that the present complaint may be allowed as prayed for in the complaint.

6        The evidence led by the complainant on the file goes unchallenged and unrebutted as Opposite Party is proceeded against exparte in the present complaint and there is no reason on the file as to why the evidence produced by the complainant be not believed. Otherwise also, due notice was given to the Opposite Party and opposite party refused to receive the same and has not appeared in the Forum in order to contest the complaint which shows that the Opposite Party has nothing to say upon the allegations leveled against him by the complainant. As such, the complainant is entitled to the relief claimed in the complaint and it stands established on record that there is some problem to the complainant of problem of broken Hus i.e. the Collar bone and the complainant has also placed on record X-ray and has also placed on record prescription slip of Ranjit Hospital G.T. Road Putlighar Amritsar Ex. C-2 in which the complainant has been advised admission and removal of implant of plating and screw,  prescription slip of Parkash Hospital Ex. C-3. It all shows that the operation conducted by the opposite party was not up to mark and the complainant experienced the same problem of broken bone. The opposite parties have charged Rs. 30,000/- from the complainant for his treatment, which remain un-rebutted. By not coming in this Forum to contest the present case, it shows that the opposite party does not want to say anything in this case.

7        In light of the above discussion, the complaint succeeds and the same is hereby partly allowed with costs in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party. Opposite Party is directed to refund Rs. 30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousand only) i.e. amount received by the opposite party from the complainant in lieu of treatment of complainant, within one month from the receipt of copy of the order..  The complainant is also entitled to Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs7,000/- (Rupees Seven thousand only) as litigation expenses. Opposite Party is directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation.  Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to record room.