Complaint No: 348 of 2019.
Date of Institution: 29.11.2019.
Date of order: 01.09.2023.
Sh.Harminder Singh Saini S/o Sh.Rattan Singh Saini resident of Backside Krishana Cinema Batala District Gurdaspur.
…..Complainant.
VERSUS
- The Corporate Hospital Amritsar, Through its Prop. Jatinder Malhotra Khanna Milk premises Batala Road Amritsar.
- Dr. Gurmit Singh Chahal Head of Department, Corporate Hospital Amritsar.
…..Opposite Parties.
Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act.
Present: For the complainant: Sh.Balraj Singh, Adv.
Opposite parties: Exparte.
Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.
ORDER
Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.
Harminder Singh Saini, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against The Corporate Hospital Amritsar etc. (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties).
2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant has got his medical claim policy from National Insurance company and unfortunately he had a problem in the month of December 2018 and he visited opposite parties hospital with complaint of chest pain etc. and he was admitted in the hospital on 12.12.2018. It is alleged that unfortunately at about 6.30 p.m. on 13.12.2018 both the opposite parties attended the complainant along with consultant Doctor Mannan Anand and he was shifted in ICU where both went on suggesting and advising the complainant that bypass SURGERY is much needed, where as he was confident that he is comfortable and don't need any such bypass surgery and even Doctor Mannan did not respond to their advice and inspite of all this they both ultimately at about 11 p.m. decided to go for bypass surgery of the complainant, on next day 8 a.m. inspite of dis agreement by complainant. It is further alleged that fortunately or unfortunately at that time at about 11 p.m. wife of complainant and his son were standing outside the ICU room and in order to know their decision of bypass surgery of complainant. On the next day morning, they both were upset and opposite party no.2 consoled him not to worry about and the complainant was also disturbed and as he did not agree to their advice and suggestion and thus on next day he was shifted to his room number 202 in the hospital where he remained admitted till date of discharge. It is further alleged that as the complainant was discharged on 20.12.2018 and a CD was also given to him regarding his treatment and after about one month of discharge, the complainant again felt some problem with his body and then he went for check up with doctor of Karam Hospital at Hoshiarpur on 13.3.2019 with record of treatment given by the opposite parties while admitted in their hospital and he remained admitted up to 19.3.2019 at Hoshiarpur. It was submitted that the doctor of Karam hospital treated him after examining the prescription slips and record of treatment given to him at the time of discharge by hospital of opposite parties. It was also submitted that as per record of treatment given to him by opposite parties and on the basis of which Doctor of Karam Hospital treated the complainant with the medicines which were ultimately of no benefit to complainant. It is further alleged that Doctor of Karam Hospital also did not check up the complainant and he saw the prescription slips of the hospital of opposite parties and gave him the treatment for a period of a week which also resulted in no benefit to the complainant. This all is due to wrong and incorrect treatment stated by the opposite parties at Amritsar. It is further alleged that due to the record of treatment prepared in the opposite parties hospital which in fact was not as per actual problem of the complainant and as such he was also not comfortable with the treatment given by Doctor of Karam hospital Hoshiarpur and then the complainant was compelled to visit Gurnoor Hospital Batala where Doctor Surjit Singh checked up and advised him to have an opinion from were not suitable to him and then he told doctor Mannan that he is the same patient whom he had attended in the opposite parties hospital on which Doctor Manan realized about the patient and he then asked to complainant that he must be having CD of his treatment from opposite parties hospital which he had and shown to doctor Mannan and doctor Mannan checked the same and told him that it is not his CD as it is of patient namely Sushila Kumari of her treatment in November 2018, which created doubt in the mind of complainant regarding the act and conduct of the opposite parties while treating him in the hospital. It is further alleged that when the complainant heard about the wrong CD given to him by opposite parties, it created a doubt regarding the act and conduct of opposite parties in his mind and thus before visiting the said hospital to obtain CD of his treatment the complainant prepared a copy of CD given to him by the hospital at the time of his discharge with him which is still with him and thereafter he visited the opposite parties hospital with the said CD along with his son and told them that it is not his CD and opposite party no.2 met him and told that he was not given any such treatment and his CD was not prepared as he was not in need of any bypass surgery and no such treatment of complainant was ever done in his hospital and on making assertion by him regarding his such treatment in the hospital, opposite parties made a search in the record of the hospital and shown to him that there is no such CD with them and also made him satisfied that no such treatment was ever given to him and this kind of such statement again harassed the complainant and made his condition physically and as well as mentally ill. It is further alleged that the complainant who visited the hospital along with his son kept waiting for about full day to know about the truth regarding his treatment and the opposite parties did not hand over the CD of his treatment to him which otherwise is also against the ethics of such a noble profession and such kind of treatment and thereafter such a behavior leaves no doubt that the complainant has been cheated by opposite parties in order to make money from insurance company from whom he had got his medical insurance for none of his such ailment as they had been stating to him and thus they all with such ulterior motive have played with the life of the complainant and prepared false and forged medical record to meet with their vested interests of making money that too at the costs of the life of the complainant and such act also amounts to deficient in service on their. It is further alleged that the complainant has made several requests to opposite parties by paying visits many a times with the request to remove his redressal and grievances, but nobody has bothered to listen him. Due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties, the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony and physical harassment and inconvenience. So, there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and prayed that the necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.3 lacs as damages and compensation and Rs.1 lac spent with Doctor Karam Hospital Hoshiarpur and Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses with interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of treatment till its realization be passed in favor of the complainant in the interest of justice.
3. Earlier, opposite parties appeared through their counsel Sh.Atul Kumar, Advocate but later on neither opposite parties appeared nor their counsel appeared and were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 19.02.2021.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Harminder Singh Saini, (Complainant) along with other documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-17.
5. Written arguments not filed by the complainant.
6. We have heard the counsel for the complainant.
7. Ld counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant has medical claim policy with National Insurance company and unfortunately complainant had a problem in the month of December 2018 and visited opposite parties hospital with complaint of chest pain etc. and he was admitted in the hospital on 12.12.2018. It is further argued that unfortunately at about 6.30 p.m. on 13.12.2018 both the opposite parties attended the complainant along with consultant Doctor Mannan Anand and was shifted in ICU where both the doctors went on suggesting and advising the complainant that bypass SURGERY is must, where as complainant was confident and comfortable and was not in need of bypass surgery and even Doctor Mannan did not respond to their advice and inspite of all this they both ultimately at about 11 p.m. decided to go for bypass surgery of the complainant, on next day 8 a.m. inspite of disagreement shown by complainant. It is further argued that fortunately or unfortunately at that time at about 11 p.m. wife of complainant and his son were standing outside the ICU room and in order to know their decision of bypass surgery of complainant. It is further argued that on the next day morning, they both were upset and opposite party no.2 consoled him not to worry about and the complainant was also disturbed as he did not agree to their advice and suggestion and thus on next day he was shifted to his room number 202 in the hospital where he remained admitted till date of discharge. It is further argued that as the complainant was discharged on 20.12.2018 and a CD was also given to him regarding his treatment and after about one month of discharge. It is further argued that the complainant again felt some problem and then he went for check up with doctor of Karam Hospital at Hoshiarpur on 13.3.2019 with record of treatment given by the opposite parties and he remained admitted up to 19.3.2019 at Hoshiarpur. It was submitted that the doctor of Karam hospital treated complainant after examining the prescription slips and record of treatment given to him at the time of discharge by hospital of opposite parties. It is further argued that as per record of treatment given to complainant by opposite parties and on the basis of which Doctor of Karam Hospital treated the complainant with the medicines which were ultimately of no help to complainant. It is further argued that Doctor of Karam Hospital also did not check up the complainant and he saw the prescription slips of the hospital of opposite parties and gave him the treatment for a period of a week. It is further argued that everything happened due to wrong and incorrect treatment stated by the opposite parties at Amritsar. It is further argued that due to the record of treatment prepared in the opposite parties hospital which in fact was not as per actual problem of the complainant and as such complainant was also not comfortable with the treatment given by Doctor of Karam hospital Hoshiarpur and then the complainant was compelled to visit Gurnoor Hospital Batala where Doctor Surjit Singh examined and advised him to have an opinion and then complainant had disclosed to the doctor Mannan that he is the same patient whom he had attended in the opposite parties hospital on which Doctor Manan realized about the patient and he then told complainant that he must be having CD of his treatment from opposite parties hospital which was shown to doctor Mannan and doctor Mannan checked the same and told him that it is not his CD as it is of patient namely Sushila Kumari of her treatment in November 2018, which created doubt in the mind of complainant regarding the act and conduct of the opposite parties while treating him in the hospital. It is further alleged that when the complainant heard about the wrong CD given to him by opposite parties, it created a doubt regarding the act and conduct of opposite parties in his mind and thus before visiting the said hospital to obtain CD of his treatment the complainant prepared a copy of CD given to him by the hospital at the time of his discharge with him which is still with him and thereafter he visited the opposite parties hospital with the said CD along with his son and told them that it is not his CD and opposite party no.2 met him and told that he was not given any such treatment and his CD was not prepared as he was not in need of any bypass surgery and no such treatment of complainant was ever done in his hospital and on making assertion by him regarding his such treatment in the hospital, opposite parties made a search in the record of the hospital and shown to him that there is no such CD with them and also made him satisfied that no such treatment was ever given to him and this kind of such statement again harassed the complainant and made his condition physically and as well as mentally ill. It is further argued that the complainant who visited the hospital along with his son kept waiting for about full day to know about the truth regarding his treatment and the opposite parties did not hand over the CD of his treatment to him which otherwise is also against the ethics of such a noble profession and such kind of treatment and thereafter such a behavior leaves no doubt that the complainant has been cheated by opposite parties in order to make money from insurance company from whom he had got his medical insurance for none of his such ailment as they had been stating to him and thus they all with such ulterior motive have played with the life of the complainant and prepared false and forged medical record to meet with their vested interests of making money that too at the costs of the life of the complainant and such act also amounts to deficient in service on their part. It is further argued that the complainant has made several requests to opposite parties by paying visits many a times with the request to remove his redressal and grievances, but nobody has bothered to listen him. It is further argued that there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
8. To prove his case the complainant has placed on record copy of insurance policy Ex.C-1, copy of discharge slip Ex.C-2 as per which the complainant remained under treatment for heart problem, treatment record of Karam Hospital Ex.C-13 to Ex.C-15. From the treatment record it is established that complainant remained admitted in the hospital of opposite party for treatment, but the main allegation of the complainant is that although the opposite parties claim that complainant had under gone by pass surgery but in fact no such surgery was ever conducted and this fact was disclosed to the complainant by Dr. Mannan. It is further alleged by the complainant that CD given to the complainant pertains to some other patient and opposite parties have wrongfully obtained insurance claim from National Insurance Company from which the complainant had purchased health policy. But perusal of record shows that complainant has not placed on record affidavit of Dr. Mannan to prove this fact that CD handed over to the complainant was of some other patient and no treatment was in fact given to the complainant or that insurance claim has been wrongly obtained by the opposite parties from National Insurance company. Even the complainant has not impleaded National Insurance Company as party to this complaint to verify the true facts regarding reimbursement of medical bills on fabricated treatment record. Although the opposite parties have remained ex parte and evidence on record has remained un rebutted but as per settled law the complainant has to stand on his own legs and not on the weakness of the other party. For this purpose we have placed reliance upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High court reported in Punjab Law reporter 2008 (2) page 645, where by it has been held by the Honable High court that "plaintiff has to stand on his own legs and not on het weekness of the defence".
9. Even from the facts of the case it is no where proved as to what loss has been suffered by the complainant. More over as for as allegations of fraud are concerned regarding alleged medical reimbursement by National Insurance Company on basis of record of some other patient. We are of the view that to prove said facts and the allegations of fraud require examination and cross examination of witnesses particularly of Dr. Mannan, Doctor from Karam Hospital, Dr. of Gurnoor Hospital and authorized person of National Insurance Company and since the procedure prescribe before this commission is summary in nature, as such this commission lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute and as such present compliant is disposed off with directions to complainant to approach the competent court of law and the complainant can avail the benefit of Section 14 of the limitation Act if so required.
10. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.
11. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record room.
(Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President
Announced: (B.S.Matharu)
Sept. 01, 2023 Member
*YP*
