DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, LUCKNOW
CASE No.484 of 2014
Sharad Kumar Yadav
S/o Sri Malik Ram Yadav,
R/o H.No.1138/85, Ashram Road,
Manas Nagar, Krishna Nagar, Lucknow.
……Complainant
Versus
Shubham Dental Clinic,
Shop No.106, Ashish Palace,
Besides Srinath Marriage Hall,
Near Engineering College Crossing,
Lucknow.
Through Proprietor Dr. S.S. Pandey.
.......Opp. Party
Present:-
Sri Vijai Varma, President.
Smt. Anju Awasthy, Member.
Sri Rajarshi Shukla, Member.
JUDGMENT
This complaint has been filed by the Complainant against the OP for refunding the charges paid with 12% interest and for compensation of Rs.50,000.00.
The case in brief of the Complainant is that the Complainant went to the clinic of OP on 28.10.2013 for treatment of his teeth where Dr. Shalini Pandey met him and advised him for OPG and RCT. After having done OPG from the recommended Pathology centre of the OP, the Complainant came to the OP on 30.10.2013 where he met Dr. S.S. Pandey who gave some treatment. The doctor suggested him to come after a few days but the Complainant did not go there due to his semester examinations. The Complainant went to the clinic on 18.04.2014 and the doctor gave him the same treatment which were given on 30.10.2013 because of gap and started the RCT from that day which was completed on 27.04.2014. The doctor said that his treatment was complete
-2-
and now he would not be having any problem regarding RCT. The Complainant did not get the relief and just after one and half months of the treatment, the material which was filled in the teeth for the treatment used to some outside the teeth and the Complainant used to suffer severe pain whenever this used to occur. The Complainant went to the OP for his problem where they demanded Rs.500.00 again for the treatment but the Complainant refused to pay any further amount as he had already paid the entire fees of Rs.1,000.00 for the treatment. The Complainant then went to KGMU, Lucknow on 21.07.2014 where the doctor advised that his prior RCT was not done properly and he required for re RCT which was done by the doctor and she showed the difference between the prior status of teeth and the current status of teeth of the Complainant via X-ray. The Complainant again approached the OP and told about his improper treatment and requested him to compensate him for the deficiency in service but the doctor compelled him to get out, hence this complaint.
Notice was issued to the OP but none appeared, hence the case proceeded exparte against OP vide orders passed on 22.12.2014.
The Complainant has filed his affidavit and 2 papers with the complaint.
Heard Counsel for the Complainant and perused the entire record.
In this case, the Complainant went to Shubham Dental Clinic for treatment of his teeth where Dr. Shalini Pandey advised him OPG and RCT after getting OPG done from the recommended Pathology of the OP. The Complainant again went to the OP where Dr. S.S. Pandey gave some treatment and asked him to come after few days but the Complainant could not go there due to his examination and again went to the clinic on 18.04.2014 where again the same treatment was given because of the gap and the procedure of RCT was
-3-
completed on 27.04.2014 and the doctor told him that the treatment was complete and he would not face any problem but the Complainant did not get any relief and stated that he felt severe pain after one and a half month and this pain recurred and when the Complainant went to the OP for the problem then they demanded Rs.500.00 again but the Complainant refused to pay any further amount and went to the KGMU on 21.07.2014 where the doctor told him that his prior RCT was not done properly and he required for re RCT and thereafter RCT was done by the doctor and showed the difference between the prior status of teeth and current status of teach via X-ray. The Complainant went to the OP and asked them to compensate for the improper treatment but the OP asked him to get out. The Complainant in support of his case has filed prescriptions of Shubham Dental Clinic of Dr. Shalini Pandey which shows that RCT was done on the Complainant on 30.10.2013. The Complainant has also filed a photocopy of prescription of the KGMU, Lucknow wherein it is mentioned that the RCT earlier done was faulty, hence re RCT was advised. The Complainant has filed an affidavit proving the contents of the complaint and from the averments made in the affidavit, it is clear that the Complainant had gone to Shubham Dental Clinic where Dr. Shalini Pandey treated him. Dr. S. S. Pandey had also treated him and that his RCT was completed on 27.04.2014 but the pain recurred after some time and when he went to KGMU for treatment then he was told that his prior RCT was not done properly and the doctor therein advised him for Re RCT. The OP was issued notice but none cared to come before the Forum nor filed any WS nor any counter affidavit to counter the allegations of the Complainant, therefore there is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant. From the documents filed by the Complainant and his affidavit, it is clear that the RCT done in the Subham Dental Clinic was not properly done and therefore re RCT
-4-
was done in the KGMU. This fact is verified from the prescription of the KGMU where it is mentioned that prior RCT done was faulty and hence re RCT was advised. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to come to the conclusion that the doctors at Shubham Dental Clinic did not treat the Complainant with proper care and caution and therefore the Complainant suffered. Obviously, in this regard the OP has committed deficiency in service and therefore the Complainant is not only entitled to get Rs.1,000.00 paid by him refunded back to him but also get compensation as also cost of the litigation.
ORDER
The complaint is partly allowed. The OP is directed to refund Rs.1,000.00 (Rupees One Thousand Only) with 9% interest from the date of filing of the complaint till the final payment is made to the Complainant.
The OP is also directed to pay Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.3,000.00 (Rupees Three Thousand only) as cost of the litigation to the Complainant. The compliance of the order is to be made within a month.
(Rajarshi Shukla) (Anju Awasthy) (Vijai Varma)
Member Member President
Dated: 8 June, 2015
