The court emphasized that the claim for compensation must be commensurate with the loss or injury suffered and cannot be arbitrary, imaginary, or remote to the cause.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Dev Raj, Member-The facts, in brief, are that the complainant is presently studying in 1st Year of her Graduation in Accessory Design at N.I.F.T, Delhi. She did all her studies till XIIth at Chandigarh. It was stated that the complainant observed that her front teeth were little recessed, when she was in 10th Class. It was further stated that the complainant consulted PGI., Chandigarh on 12.11.2010 Vide outpatient card dated 12.11.2010 (Annexure C-1). It was further stated that due to clash in school timings, the complainant approached Gupta’s Dental Clinic & Orthodontic Centre, Sector 22-A, Chandigarh, a private doctor, which put braces on the upper teeth without wires so that she got used to wearing the same (prescription and fee receipts - Annexures C-2 and C-2 respectively). It was further stated that the complainant developed a small painful ulcer in her mouth and her parents took her to the doctor, who was not available at that time.

2. It was further stated that since there was pain in her mouth, the complainant was taken to Opposite Party no.2, who prescribed some ointment to be applied to the ulcer. It was further stated that Opposite Party No.2 also convinced the complainant and her parents that the treatment method of braces would take a very long time of one and a half years, and only two of her upper teeth were a little recessed and irregular. It was further stated that Opposite Party No.2, claimed that he knew of a very simple non-invasive method of correcting the appearance of those two teeth, which involved just pasting a thin layer of acrylic on them in a shape which would suit her face. It was further stated that the cost for two teeth would be Rs.2,400/- and it would require just two sittings. It was further stated that Opposite Party No.2, without the consent of the complainant, and her parents, removed the braces and charged Rs.1,000/- on 1.4.2011 (photographs Annexure C-5 and prescription Annexure C-6). It was further stated that on 22.5.2011, Opposite Party No.2 fixed some plastic caps, on the complainant’s teeth and charged Rs.3,000/- and told to come back on 25.5.2011.

3. It was further stated that on 26.5.2011, the complainant alongwith her parents went to Opposite Party No.1 Clinic and the parents were asked to sit and wait outside. It was further stated that the complainant was taken to the dental chair and after sometime, the parents heard her cries who was in great pain. It was further stated that they rushed to the complainant and were horrified to see that the teeth were bleeding profusely as they had been grinded drastically and being exposed to the air, were giving unbearable pain to her. It was discovered that on 22.5.2011, Opposite Party No.2, after injecting anesthesia in her gums, had grinded her teeth so drastically that those were reduced to half of their original size. It was found that instead of treating only two front upper teeth, on which he was to just paste something, Opposite Party No.1 had grinded six of her front teeth and that too without the consent of the parents of the complainants. It was further stated that Opposite Party No.2 kept on trying for about two hours to fit the crowns on her excessive grounded teeth, and when he failed to do so, he told the parents of the complainant that he would get them replaced/corrected and demanded Rs.40,000/- on the spot for crowns. It was further stated that after receipt of Rs.40,000/-, Opposite Party No.2, put plastic crowns on her grinded teeth and told them to come after 3 to 4 days.

4. It was further stated that the painful ordeal of the complainant continued and she has not led a single day, without pain. It was further stated that after every six months, the complainant has to get her temporary acrylic crowns changed as these get chipped and discolored and food starts seeping through them, thus, infecting the gums causing gingivitis and horrible pain. It was further stated that due to the treatment done by the Opposite