Consumer Complaint No. 212 of 2015
Date of filing: 07-10-2015 Date of disposal: 28-09-2016.
Present :
Sri Asoke Kr. Mandal, Hon’ble President,
Smt. Silpi Majumder, Hon’ble Member,
Sri Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Hon’ble Member,
Dr. Ram Pratap Gupta, C/O R.L.Gupta,
N.S.B. Road, Ukhra P.O.- Ukhra,
P.S.-Andal, Dist.-Burdwan, W.B. Complainant.
VERSUS
The Chairman,
The Mission Hospital, Durgapur,
219(P) Immon Kalyan Sarani, Sector- 2C,
Bidhan Nagar, P.S. Bidhan Nagar phari
Under New Township Police Station,
Durgapur- 713212. Opposite Parties.
Appeared for the complainant : Himself.
Appeared for the Opposite Party : Addvocate Deb Krishna Sinha.
JUDGEMENT
This is a case U/s.12 of the C.P. Act,1986 for an award directing the O.P. to return back Rs. 28,941/- which he received as excess amount from the complainant’s wife Mrs. Nisha Gupta, to pay compensation for 3 days as the O.P. did not allow Mrs. Nisha Gupta in Hospital upto maximum duration, to hand over the copies of indoor treatment paper of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, to pay Rs. 70,000/- as compensation for mental pain, sufferings & harassment and also as litigation cost to the complainant.
The complainant’s case in short is that the complainant had admitted his wife Mrs. Nisha Gupta as a patient of Tariff Category CGHS, in Mission Hospital, Durgapur on 31.08.2015 for an operation named ‘Abdominal Hystfrectomy’. On said date of
-2-
admission the complainant deposited Rs. 20,000/- and the O.P. issued receipt/bill in the name of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta. After operation the patient was discharged on 04.09.2015 by the O.P. Hospital on receipt of further an amount of Rs. 28,779/- and issuing another receipt/bill in the name of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta. Thereafter the complainant consulted C.G.H.S.(Central Government Health Scheme) circulars which explain the meaning of package, for the rate of such operation of his wife Mrs. Nisha Gupta and he noticed that he had to pay total Rs. 19,838/- (Rate of N.A.B.H. Accredited Hospital i.e Rs. 17250/- +15% of such amount) as the O.P. Hospital is a Super Speciality Hospital. As per said circular the patient party has to pay only the package charge which covers all charges from registration for admission to discharge and minimum stay for major operation is 7 days. Though the operation of Mrs. Nisha Gupta was major, she was discharged on fifth day. In spite of application & requests made by the complainant, the O.P. has not supplied the copies of indoor treatment paper and has not repaid the excess amount illegally received by him. From the above, it is clear that there were deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P. and for such, the complainant has been suffering from mental pain & harassment and has been forced to come before this Forum for relief. So the complainant is entitled to get such excess amount, compensation and litigation cost from the O.P. Hence this case with the prayers as mentioned above.
The O.P. contested this case by filing written version while stating inter alia that the case is not maintainable and the complainant has no cause of action for this case. It has been further stated by this O.P. that patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta of 47 years old female is a known case of fibroid uterus and menor rghagia was admitted for TSH+BSO under SAB Post operatively patient was started on IV fluids NS:RL @ 100 ml, injection Phenegran, injection Metrogyl, injection Supacef, injection Fortwin and Soft diet, on 03.09.2015 the patient was stable and started with normal diet accordingly the patient was discharged on 04.09.2015, as per CGHS Package, the patient had liability to pay Rs. 19,838/- but due to unintentional clerical mistake the bill amount revealed the amount of Rs. 48,779/- which was approximately the package for general patients, the O.P. after receiving the letter dt. 20.09.2015 from the complainant immediately took steps to refund the excess amount and the O.P. through Mr. Amit an employee of the Finance Dept. of the Hospital sent a cheque dt. 21.09.2015 to the complainant but the complainant refused to accept
-3-
the same, the O.P. has kept ready the copies of indoor treatment paper for supply of the same to the complainant but the complainant or his authorised person has not come to receive the same, there is/was no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P., the O.P. is/was willing to rectify the clerical mistake by paying the excess amount to the complainant and to hand over the copies of indoor treatment paper of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta to the complainant. It is therefore claimed by this O.P. that the case is liable to be dismissed.
DECISION WITH REASONS
In support of the case as ventilated in the complaint the complainant has relied upon the photo copies medical card of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, two money receipts showing payment of Rs. 20,000/- & Rs. 28,779/- to the O.P., discharge certificate of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, medical bill issued by the O.P., CGHS rate chart, notification showing the meaning of package, letters sent to the O.P. on 21.09.2015 by the complainant and postal receipts. The complainant has also relied upon his evidence on affidavit and the reply submitted by the O.P. On the other hand the O.P. has relied upon the contents of his W.V. supported by affidavit.
On carefully perusing the contents of the pleadings, it appears the O.P. has not denied the case of the complainant that the complainant had admitted his wife Mrs. Nisha Gupta as a patient of Tariff Category CGHS, in Mission Hospital, Durgapur on 31.08.2015 for an operation named ‘Abdominal Hystfrectomy’, on said date of admission the complainant deposited Rs. 20,000/- and the O.P. issued receipt/bill in the name of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, after operation the patient was discharged on 04.09.2015 by the O.P. Hospital on receipt of further an amount of Rs. 28,779/- and issuing another receipt/bill in the name of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, as per C.G.H.S.(Central Government Health Scheme) circulars which explain the meaning of package, the complainant had to pay total Rs. 19,838/- (Rate of N.A.B.H. Accredited Hospital i.e Rs. 17250/- +15% of such amount) as the O.P. Hospital is a Super Speciality Hospital, as per said circular the patient party has to pay only the package charge which covers all charges from registration for admission to discharge. The O.P. has only stated that due to unintentional clerical mistake the bill amount revealed the amount of Rs. 48,779/- which was approximately the package for general patients, the O.P. after receiving the
-4-
letter dt. 20.09.2015 from the complainant immediately took steps to refund the excess amount. The O.P. has further stated that he through Mr. Amit an employee of the Finance Dept. of the Hospital sent a cheque dt. 21.09.2015 to the complainant but the complainant refused to accept the same. To prove this specific case the O.P. has adduced no corroborative evidence. The O.P. had enough scope to adduce evidence of Mr. Amit the employee of the Finance Dept. of the Hospital. But he has failed to do so. Accordingly we fined that the O.P. has failed to prove this specific case.
The O.P. has admitted that the complainant being the husband of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, is entitled to get back the excess amount of Rs. Rs. 28,941/- and the copies of indoor treatment paper of the patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta and the O.P. is ready to pay such amount to the complainant and he has kept ready the copies of indoor treatment paper for supply of the same to the complainant but the complainant or his authorised person has not come to receive the same.
The copy of CGHS (Central Government Health Scheme) shows that the Package rates envisage upto a maximum duration of indoor treatment is 7 days for other Major Surgeries. So the case of the complainant that minimum stay for mejor operation is 7 days does not stand. The operation of Mrs. Nisha Gupta was major no doubt but her discharged on fifth day is not illegal as on 4th. Day of her operation, she was stable and started with normal diet.
In view of the above discussions the complainant is not entitled to get an award directing the O.P. to pay compensation for 3 days as claimed on the ground that the O.P. did not allow patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta in Hospital upto 7 days but he is entitled to get an award directing the O.P. to repay Rs. 28,941/- with interest @ Rs. 9% p.a. from the date of filing of this case, to hand over the copies of indoor treatment paper of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, to pay compensation for mental pain & harassment and to pay litigation cost to the complainant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that to pay Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and to pay Rs. 1000/- as litigation cost to the complainant, shall meet the ends of justice.
-5-
Accordingly the complaint succeeds.
Fees paid is correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint case be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P., accordingly, the complainant do get an award directing the O.P. to repay Rs. 28,941/- with interest @ Rs. 9% p.a. from the date of filing of this case, to hand over the copies of indoor treatment paper of patient Mrs. Nisha Gupta, to pay Rs. 3,000/- as compensation for mental pain & harassment and to pay Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within 30 days from this day, failing which the total awarded amount will carry interest @ 12% p.a. upto the realization of the same and the complainant will be at liberty to put this order in execution in accordance with law.
Let copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
(Asoke Kr. Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Asoke Kr. Mandal)
President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder) (Sri Pankaj Kr. Sinha)
Member Member
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
