State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Vaidhyanathan Nagarjan vs . Dr. V.K. Bhagwatkar & Others on 4 May, 2011
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
STATE CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH
AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR,
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES,
NAGPUR-440 001
First Appeal
No. A/08/966
(Arisen out
of Order Dated 22/10/2008 in Case No. CC/08/165 of District Nagpur)
1. VAIDHYANATHAN NAGARJAN
PLOT NO 3 HOUSE NO 3 MAMA ROAD DHARAMPETH
NAGPUR
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. DR. V.K. BHAGWATKAR & OTHERS
CARDIYA CARE AANCY INSTITUTE OF PREVENTIVE
CARDIOLOGY SHIV ESTATE PLOT NO 1 BHAGWAGHAR
DAHARMPETH NAGPUR
2. DR.ANURADHA AAGASHE
KRDIYA CARE ANSI INSTITUTE OF PREVENTIVE CARDIOLOGY
SHIV GAURAV STATE PLOT NO 1 BHAGWAGHAR DHARAMPETH
NAGPUR
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
HON'BLE P.N.KASHALKAR PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER
PRESENT:
ADV SOLAT, Advocate for the Appellant 1
ORDER
PASSED BY SHRI P.N.KASHALKAR, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the original complainant whose complaint bearing No.165/08 was partly allowed by the District Forum, Nagpur vide judgment and order dated 22/10/2008 and the Opponents Dr.Bhagwatkar and Dr.Agashe were directed to pay Rs.30000/- to the complainant with 9% interest from 18/3/2008 and also to pay Rs.3000/- towards cost. Aggrieved by this order, the complainant has filed this appeal.
The case of the complainant in nutshell is that one day, he was having chest pain and so he approached Avanti Institute of Cardiology and he was advised to undergo Angiography. Hence he approached Super Speciality Hospital, Nagpur where he had undergone clinical tests and he was advised to undergo angioplasty at estimated expenses of Rs.90,000/-.
According to complainant, after reading daily Hitwad and Lokmat, he had approached Cardicare Institute of Cardiology run by Respondents. They assured the complainant that there was no necessity of doing angiography and by giving treatment in their hospital his heart ailment may be cured, hence he paid in all Rs.46,000/- to the opponents and took treatment in the hospital of opponent, however, his grievance is that his ailment could not be cured and therefore he alleged deficiency in service on their part and claimed refund of Rs.46,000/-
besides Rs.4 lac towards compensation and Rs.20000/- as cost.
The complaint was contested by the opponents by filing written version. According to them, the complainant had concealed the fact that on 14/6/06 he had suffered heart attack and was admitted in Avanti Heart Institute where he had undergone angiography. They admitted that the complainant was admitted in their hospital from 11/7/2006 to 9/11/2006 and he was suffering from Hyper Tension and Heart Ailment. Opponents denied that they had not given any treatment and asserted that the complainant was given yogic treatment, nebulization and diet counseling. Hence they prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
After considering affidavits and documents placed on record, the forum below was pleased to allow the complaint partly and directed the opponents to pay Rs.30000/- to the complainant with 9% interest from 18/3/2008 and also to pay Rs.3000/- towards cost. Not satisfied with the compensation granted by the forum, the complainant has filed this appeal.
We heard Adv.Solat for the appellant. Respondent and his counsel are absent. Adv.Solat argued that the compensation awarded by the forum requires to be enhanced. However we are finding that the award passed by the forum is just and proper. It is to be noted that the complainant was admitted in opponents hospital from 11/7/2006 to 9/11/2006 and he took some treatment there. So, something should be paid to the respondents and, therefore, the forum below deducted Rs.16,000/- from the amount of Rs.46,000/- paid by the complainant for the said treatment and ordered the opponents to refund back Rs.30,000/- with 9% interest thereon. In our view, the said judgment is appearing to be just and proper and there is no scope of enhancement of compensation or refund of amount than the already granted by the District Forum. Appeal is devoid of merits.
Hence the order
ORDER
1) Appeal is dismissed.
2) No order as to cost.
3) Inform the parties accordingly.
Delivered on 04/05/2011.
[ HON'BLE
P.N.KASHALKAR]
PRESIDING MEMBER
[ HON'BLE
SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL]
MEMBER