Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/147/2014

Mrs.Shilpa S.Nayak,W/o Sanjay Nayak, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

Sangamithri Kalaiselvi

24 Jan 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 24.03.2014

                                                                          Date of Order : 24.01.2019

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B., PGDCLP.               : MEMBER-I

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.147/2014

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019

                                 

Mrs. Shipa S. Nayak,

W/o. Mr. Sanjay Nayak,

No.19, 4^th Main Road,

Besant Nagar,

Chennai – 600 090.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                        

 

  ..Versus..

 

The Manager,

Vibes Slimming of Beauty Laser,

An Alankar Group Enterprise,

29, New No.63, Second Street,

Kamaraj Avenue,

Kasturbai Nagar,

Adyar,

Chennai – 600 020.                                                   ..  Opposite party.            

 

Counsel for the complainant      :  M/s. A. Kalaiselvi & another

Counsel for the opposite party  :  M/s. J. Kamaraj & another

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards medical treatment with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of claim and to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that on seeing the advertisement given by the opposite party, she undergone laser therapy for removal of unwanted hairs on her face.  The complainant paid a sum of Rs.5,617/- as advance on 08.02.2014  through ICICI Bank Ltd Visa card for which, the opposite party issued the receipt and bill No.2973 for package No.PKG/0117/13-14/001246 for 8 sitting of laser treatment.  The complainant submits that the opposite party has conducted the laser treatment by using untrained technician and unprofessional approach which caused serious injuries on her face.  The complainant submits that after the said treatment she developed scars, marks, black spots on her face, lips etc.  The complainant submits that due to careless act of the opposite party scar and black spots occurred on her face including injury, for which, the complainant took treatment with other Doctors and expended a huge amount of Rs.3,00,000/-.  The complainant submits that the improper treatment carried out by the opposite party without the guidance of specialist dermatologist caused great inconvenience. Hence, a notice through email dated:09.02.2014 & reminder dated:11.02.2014 & 13.02.2014 was issued for which, there is no response.  The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony.  Hence the complaint is filed before this Forum.

 

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.     The opposite party denies that they did the laser treatment by using untrained technician in unprofessional approach which cause serious injury on her face; that there were  no supervising doctors nor dermatologist to advice the technician during the process that they had used frequency in the laser that burnt her under lips and created injury that the technician nor the Manager were listening to the complainant that was being caused and continued the treatment till enough damage was done on the face and they also further denies their mistake that due to this complainant was put to severe mental agony and stress which couldn’t to be expressed in words that the complainant took treatment from the dermatologist as she incurred heavy pain due to burn; that she sent various notices and mail are which no reply that due to the mistreatment she lost her appearance and dermatologist opined that there was a deep scar and injury on the face; that due to the careless act of the above said opposite party the petitioner lost her beauty and appearance and she was advised to take treatment to remove the scar and injury for this further treatment she has bear heavy cost more than 2 laksh etc are as false and incorrect.    The opposite party states that there were doctors employed in the opposite party’s institution and that they are doing supervisory work as well as the work itself.  Therefore, the question of availability and working of non-technical persons and non-experts in the opposite party’s institution doe not arise.  During the treatment the technician as well as doctor prescribes certain precautionary measures such as use of water, soap and other cosmetics etc.  If any one of the customer who did not follow the precautionary measures might have some problems and that problems were cured by the opposite party themselves.   If any of the customer who faced troubles or suffering ought to have approached the opposite party and the employed experts will cure them immediately likewise so many customer are enjoying this beneficial treatment to who, had reactions in the body and face.  The complainant never approached the opposite party to cure the reactions.  However, she willfully and wantonly consulted another doctor, got some commercial opinion only with an intention to get compensation from the opposite party.     The opposite party submits that they have not served with any copies of the document to show that the treatment taken by with other doctor for the adverse reaction occurred on her face due to the treatment done by the opposite party.  Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.    To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as her evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.  The opposite party after filing his written version has not preferred to file  any proof affidavit with documents to prove the contentions raised in the written version and hence it is concluded as ‘No Proof Affidavit’.

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards medical treatment with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

The opposite party after filed written version has not preferred to file  any proof affidavit with documents to prove the contentions raised in the written version.   The opposite party and Counsel not turned up to advance any argument also.  The complainant filed written arguments.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavit of the complainant and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that on seeing the advertisement given by the opposite party, she undergone laser therapy for removal of unwanted hairs on her face.  But the complainant has not produced any document of such advertisement as the opposite party does laser therapy.  Further the contention of the complainant is that she paid a sum of Rs.5,617/- through her debit card vide Ex.A1 for which, the opposite party issued the receipt as per Ex.A2.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party has not conducted any laser treatment with an expert.  The technician also not properly qualified resulting scars, marks, black spots on her face, lips etc caused is seen from Ex.A3, photographs.  Further the contention of the complainant is that due to the scar and black spots including injury on the face of the complainant; the complainant was constrained to take treatment with other Doctors and expended a huge amount of Rs.3,00,000/-.   But on a careful perusal of records, the complainant produced Ex.A6 prescription dated:07.03.2014 issued by one Dr. Amudha, Dermatologists attached with M/s. Fortis Malar Hospital shows some prescription of cream etc.  The complainant has not produced any medical bill for purchase of such medicines, creams etc.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the improper treatment carried out by the opposite party without the guidance of specialist in dermatology caused great inconvenience. Hence, a notice through email dated:09.02.2014 as per Ex.A4 & reminder dated:11.02.2014 & 13.02.2014 as per Ex.A5 was issued for which, there is no response.  Hence, the complainant was constrained to file this case for such deficiency in service.

6.     The opposite party eventhough filing written version has not preferred to file any proof affidavit with the documents to prove the contentions raised in the written version.  The opposite party pleaded in the written version that that the opposite party’s company name is Vibes Healthcare Ltd and not Vibes Slimming of Beauty laser, the treatment given to the complainant by its experts, the reaction is only due to the complainant’s non-cooperation.   But the opposite party has not produced any record to prove the treatment given by experts proves the deficiency in service. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant has expended only a sum of Rs.5,617/- and the complainant has not produced any document to prove such huge expenditure of Rs.3,00,000/-.  Hence this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.5,617/- being amount paid as an advance and to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost Rs.5,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,617/- (Rupees Five thousand six hundred and seventeen only) being amount paid as advance and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.  

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 24^th day of January 2019. 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	08.02.2014	Copy of debit card receipt
Ex.A2	08.02.2014	Copy of receipt given by the opposite party
Ex.A3		Copy of photos
Ex.A4	09.02.2014	Copy of letter given by the complainant’s husband
Ex.A5	11.02.2014 & 13.02.2014	Copy of reminder letter
Ex.A6	07.03.2014	Copy of Doctor Opinion & Prescription

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  No Proof Affidavit

 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT