Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/1111/2019

Rajesh Kumar Kaushik Advocate - Complainant(s)

Versus

Studio-6 Life Style Clinic Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Bhupender Singh Adv.

16 Sep 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	1111/2019
Date of Institution	:	15.11.2019
Date of Decision	:	16.09.2022

 

                     

            

 

Rajesh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate aged  33 years son of Shri Balwant Rai Sharma r/o H.No.1190/12,Ram Nagar Clony, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.

 

2^nd Address:

Chamber No.52, Double Storey, District Courts, Kurukshetra.

                 ...  Complainant.

Versus

1.  Studio-6 Life Style Clinic Private Ltd., SCO-2419-2420, 2^nd Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh 160022 through its Managing Director/Authorized Signatory.

 

2.  Dr.Ajay K.Dadwal, Medical Director, Studio-6 Life Style Clinic Private Ltd., SCO-2419-2420, 2^nd Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh 160022.

 

3.  Kabira Global Hair Transplant, SCO-2425-2426, 2^nd Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh 160022 through its Managing Director/Authorized Signatory. 

 

…. Opposite Parties.

 

BEFORE:
	SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA,	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Argued by:-
	Complainant in person.
	Sh.Gurmukh Singh, Advocate for the OPs.

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.     Briefly stated, the facts of case as alleged by the complainant are that  being allured by the assurances of the OPs, he agreed to take the hair transplantation treatment, costing Rs.52000/- including SGST/CGST and paid the said amount against receipt dated 28.12.2017. Thereafter, the OPs took the complainant into the operation theater and at that the friends of the complainant were also with him. The environment of the OT was not pleasant/peaceful because the entire staff seemed to be in hurry and when he asked where are the doctors, the complainant was told that the doctor is out of station and all the persons present there are trained in hair transplantation work and they are doing the treatment of all the patients. So the treatment of the complainant was done by the attendants and not by the doctor.  According to the complainant, at the time of treatment, there was huge unbearable pain which cannot be described in words due to which there was swelling on his head and mouth. After the treatment, OP No.2 assured that within three months, almost all the new hairs shall starts growth. The complainant followed all the instructions of the OPs and remained in their touch but after three months there was no growth of hairs. However, the OPs asked to him to wait for more three months for the best result of the treatment.  It has further been averred that after waiting six months, there was no growth of hairs. Finally, the complainant sent emails dated 10.04.2019 and 13.09.2019 to the OPs refund to Rs.52000//- but to no effect. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.  
2.     In their written statement, the OPs while admitting the factual matrix of the case has pleaded that OP No.3 is running a support centre for many hair transplant clinics across India owned by OP No.1 and other companies. It has further been pleaded that the complainant signed a consent from before going through the procedure of hair transplant, wherein all the procedures, any complications arising out of the procedure was explained to him.  The second copy of the first page of the consent form singed by the complainant was also attached and the original consent is destroyed as retention period of the same is 18 months.  It has further been pleaded that as every person responds differently to the treatment so the company cannot assures the result of the treatment with 100% accuracy.  According to the OPs, the hair transplant procedure involves grafts on the backside of the head or beard area to be extracted and planted on the desired bald area and the same has been explained to the complainant and the roots once extracted will not grow back. It has further been pleaded that required density was provided on the bald area at the time of treatment but no one has taken personal responsibility for the same. Moreover, the complainant has not followed the post surgery instructions due to which the required density was not achieved.   It has further been pleaded that OP No.3 has no role in success /failure of the procedure. The remaining allegations have been denied, being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
3.     The complainant filed rejoinder to the written reply of the Opposite Parties controverting their stand and reiterating his own.
4.     We have heard the complainant in person, Counsel for the OPs and have gone through the documents on record as well as written submissions. 
5.     From the pleadings of the parties and evidence on record, it is established that the OPs have allured the complainant by stating that OPs are specifically trained in hair transplantation by international expert and had successfully treated over lakhs of hair patients and that the treatment is very easy and painless. It is fact on record that the OPs have charged a sum of Rs.52,000/- from the complainant on account of hair transplant surgery but the OPs have failed to give the desired results as after waiting three months, followed by another three months, the complainant did not find any recovery and there is no growth of new hair as assured by the OPs. The complainant remained in touch with the OPs  and even followed all the instructions and undergone complete procedure for hair transplant surgery but despite this, there was no growth of his hair since the date of hair transplantation.  The complainant informed the OPs about the failure of the hair transplantation but they put off the matter on one or other ground. 
6.     Another contention of the learned counsel for the OPs is, before undertaking the surgery i.e. to say hair transplant in the year 2017, consent form (Annexure R-1) was signed by the complainant in which there was a reference that as a result of surgical procedure or treatment it is not possible to guarantee a successful result or to assure an outcome that will meet his goals.  It is a consent form signed in the relationship of a doctor and patient before conducting the operation where the patient is always under the influence of a doctor and the patient/person to be operated is invariably full of stress and anxiety with regard to 100% success which was guaranteed in this case.  Now a somersault was taken by the OPs just to defend themselves or deceive the complainant while taking him on the operation table by declaring that it is not possible to guarantee a successful result.  Presumably, this consent form had been got signed under pressure, therefore, it cannot be relied upon in this situation. In this particular situation, consent form placed on record is only a blank form which cannot be used as a defence or some kind of justification that to by a qualified doctor in the field. 
7.     The correspondence exchanged between the parties is evident of the fact that the OPs badly failed to produce the desired results despite having charged hefty amount of Rs.52,000/- paid by the complainant on account of hair transplantation.     Thus, we have no hesitation to conclude that the OPs are guilty of deficiency in service which certainly has caused immense mental and physical harassment to the complainant besides financial loss.
8.     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The opposite parties are directed as under ;-

1.     To refund Rs.52,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from 28.12.2017 till its realization.
2.     To pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant towards mental agony and harassment.
3. To pay Rs.7,000/- as litigation expenses.

This order be complied with by the OP(s), within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the amount at Sr.No.(i) and (ii) shall carry interest @12% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment besides payment of litigation costs.

9.     Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

 

Announced 16.09.2022
	Sd/- (PRITI MALHOTRA) PRESIDING MEMBER
	Sd/- (B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER