2008(3) CPR 63
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MUMBAI
B.B. Vagyani, President and S.P. Lale, Member
Harbans Singh and Anr. —Complainants
versus
Habil Khorakhiwala CMD Wockhardt
Ltd. —Respondent
First Appeal No.1541 of 2004
With First Appeal No. 1742 of 2004
Decided on 28.4.2008
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Original Complainants: In person.
For the Respondent/Hospital:Mr. Shyam Kondhalkar, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Giving go by to public advertisement at eleventh hour amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986— Sections 12 and 17—Deficiency in service—Package for heart surgery advertised by opposite party respondent hospital—As against package cost at Rs. 1,20,000 complainants were forced to deposit Rs. 1,60,000 on pretext that package was not yet given effect to —Giving go bye to public advertisement at eleventh hour in case of emergency amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice—Defence plea that Rs. 40,000 was charged against pharmacy and consumable did not appeal to reason—District Forum rightly directed refund of excess amount with interest at 9 % p.a. Rs. 10,000 awarded as compensation for mental harassment. (Paras 11 to 14)
Result: Appeals disposed of.
B.B. Vagyani, President— Shri Harbans Singh and Shri Ratanbir Singh Kohli filed Consumer Complaint No.259/2003 against M/s. Wockhardt Limited, Wockhardt Towers, Bandra, Mumbai for refund of money and for compensation for deficient service rendered by the hospital.
2. The said complaint was opposed by the hospital. The hospital denied to have rendered deficient service. According to the hospital, proper medical treatment was given to the patient and reasonable charges were recovered from the patient.
3. The Forum below partly allowed the complaint and directed the hospital to refund Rs.40,000 to the patient together with interest at the rate of 9% from 27.8.2002 till the date of realization. The Forum below awarded a sum of Rs.l,000 to the complainants as a cost of litigation.
4. Original complainants were not satisfied with the quantum awarded by the Forum below. They filed Appeal No.1541/2004. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order the hospital has preferred Appeal No.1742/2004.
5. These two appeals arise out of
order dated 8.6.2004 passed in Consumer Complaint No.259.2003, we therefore propose to decide these two appeals by common order.
6. We heard original complainants in person and Mr. Shyam Kondhalkar, Adv. for the hospital.
7. We carefully perused the order under challenge. We also perused the relevant documents which are placed on record.
8. Complainant No.2 had heart problem. Complainants came across an advertisement which was given by the hospital. The advertisement was given in Times of India. It was stated in the advertisement that world class treatment at an affordable cost would be given. It was further stated in the said advertisement that the package’ for heart surgery would cost of Rs.1,20,000. The complainants therefore approached the hospital. The complainants were told that the package which was referred in the advertisement was not yet introduced in practice. The hospital further told them that another package of Rs. 1,60,000 was available. Complainant No.2 had an emergency and therefore he was hospitalized on 18.8.2002. Initially, Rs.10,000 were paid and balance amount of Rs.1,50,000 was paid to the hospital on the next day of the admission. The complainants were asked to pay Rs.40,000 by way of security deposit. Under protest complainants paid Rs.40,000 to the hospital on 19.8.2002. The hospital issued a bill of Rs.2,05,000 after heart surgery. The complainants did not receive the deposit money. Therefore, they approached General Manager of the hospital. The complainants were forced to pay additional amount of Rs.5,000 and thereafter the patient was discharged. The complainants made serious grievance about excess payment of Rs.85,000. They therefore filed consumer complaint in the Forum below to recover excess charges of Rs.85,000 and Rs.50,000 for mental harassment.
9. The hospital raised a contention that besides package amount of Rs.1,60,000 the hospital charged Rs.40,000 against pharmacy and the consumables which were out side the purview of the package offered to the complainants. The hospital therefore denied to have recovered excess charges.
10. The public advertisement is very important piece of documentary evidence. We are inclined to reproduce the advertisement.
To add to the international quality control of Harvard and the commitment of the Wockhardt team is the immense expertise that the Wockhardt Hospital and Heart Institute at Bangalore have to offer. The hospital at Bangalore was the first hospital in India to perform minimally invasive coronary artery bypass surgery. It was again the first hospital in Karnataka to perform intra-coronary stint implantation, internal carotid angioplasty and cerebral angioplasty. It is also the first hospital in south Asia to be recognized by the American Blue Cross Shield Association on their world wide network of participating hospitals. Wockhardt also runs the Wockhardt Hospital and Kidney Institute, Kolkata, the premier institute for kidney ailme