Order No.08

The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant is present. Today is fixed for admission hearing. The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant was induced to undergo Bilateral Tubal Ligation at Saktipur Rural Hospital, Beldanga II, on 18.03.14 and she was discharged on 19.03.14 but subsequently she was found pregnant for failure of Bilateral Tubal Ligation. It is urged that the OPs are responsible for failure of Bilateral Tubal Ligation due to their negligence and deficiency in service. He also draws  our  attention to the decisions reported in 1995 (6) SCC 651Vs. VP Shantha and others and a downloaded copy of judgment passed by the HP State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Simla in FA No.59/2018 dated 09.05.19. It is urged that the Complainant hired the services of the OPs and the service rendered free of charge is also service in terms of section 2 (1) (o) of the CP Act, 1986. He draws our attention to Para 55 (x) of the judgment reported in 1995 (6) SCC 651 where in it is held that ‘’Service rendered at a Government hospital/health centre/dispensary where services are rendered on payment of charges and also rendered free of charge to other persons availing such services would fall within the ambit of the expression ‘service’ as defined in Section 2(1)(o) of the Act irrespective of the fact that the service is rendered free of charge to persons who do not pay for such service. Free service would also be ‘Service’ and the recipient a ‘’consumer’’ under the Act.’’

           Perused the written complaint ,copy of Advocate’s letter dated 11.01.19 and the decisions referred by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant. Service is defined under section 2(1)(o) of the CP Act in the following manner:- ‘’Service” means of any description which is made available to potential [users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of ] facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, [housing construction], entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service.’’

        Therefore, rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal services is excluded from the term services ás defined in the CP Act, 1986. The Hon’ble Apex Court has been pleased to clarify the confusion in its judgment passed in Indian Medical Association Vs. VP Shantha and Others. The Complainant has not filed any document to establish that she hired services of the OP specially the services of the  OP No.5 on payment of charges or there is system in Government Hospital in West Bengal to pay charges for treatment.

With due regard to the decisions referred by the Ld. Advocate for Complainant, we think that the decisions as referred by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant are not at all helpful for the Complainant. Hence, we find that the Complainant has failed to establish that she hired services of the OPs either on payment of charges or charges are levied at Government hospital in West Bengal for bilateraltubal ligation.

       Accordingly, we find no justification to admit the complaint. Hence, the complaint is rejected as not maintainable.