Order

MR. DEEPAK SONI VS. R.P. MEMORIAL HOSPITAL & ORS.

13.03.2024 Present: Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Counsel for the Complainant Mr. Sandeep Kumar and Mr. Mohit Kumar, Counsels for the Opposite Party no.1-3.

IA-252/2024 IN CC-40/2021

ORDER

IA-252/2024 has been moved on behalf of the Applicants/Opposite Party No.1-3 vide diary no.923 dated 29.01.2024 praying for dismissal of the complaint on the point of pecuniary jurisdiction.

It is the submission of the Applicants/Opposite Parties that the attendant of the patient had deposited only Rs.500/- at the time of admission of the deceased patient to the Opposite Parties, therefore present complaint is not maintainable before this Commission being barred by pecuniary jurisdiction.

On the other hand, the Complainant, has filed its reply to the present applciation and to the certain querry/ clarifiacation raised by this Commission vide order dated

20.12.2023, and has submitted that the present complaint very well falls within the pecuniary Jurisdiction this Commission and the compensation calculated in the complaint is as follows:

a. The complainant claimed the total amount of compensation in the present complaint to the tune of Rs. 1,63,00,000/- (One Crore Sixty-Three Lacs) under different heads including the damage for the loss of income, cost of litigation and compensation on account of Loss on account of Deprivation of Pleasure and companionship, Care, Love and affection and Emotional Distress, Pain &

Sufferings for Husband & Son, due to the unnatural death of Smt.Poonam Joshi, caused by negligence and carelessness of the OP's.

b. It is submitted that the damages suffered by patients in most medical negligence cases can be classified into two main categories: Economic or Pecuniary Loss and Non-Economic Non-Pecuniary Loss.

c. The Pecuniary loss is the damage that is capable of being directly calculated in money terms. For example, the loss of earnings, both actual and future, medical expenses, traveling expenses, and the cost of special equipment, etc.

d. Non-pecuniary losses are immeasurable matters such as pain and suffering which means discomfort and physical pain, but also emotional distress, anxiety, and stress that are linked to the injuries and loss of amenities attributable to such injury.

e. To the satisfaction of this Hon'ble Commission, the complainant submits the calculations of how the quantum of loss of income caused due to the death of Smt. Poonam Joshi is calculated.

f. The calculation of loss of income is calculated by the formula that was appreciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while deciding the quantum of compensation in a medical negligence case, mentioned below:

[70 years-(age at the time of death of deceased)] x [annual income + 30% for inflation 1/3 for expenses]

Accordingly, the complainant calculated the amount of Rs. 50 lacs claimed in the first head. It is pertinent to mention here that at the time of death, the deceased Poonam Joshi was only 31 years old and she was working with G4S Secure Solutions (India)

Private Limited and appointed as 'Lady Head Guard' and was earning around Rs.

12,500/- per month at the time of death.

• As per the formula, the proximate remaining age comes to 39 years (70-31 -39)

•Annual income is Rs. 1,50,000/- (12,500*12)

• 30% of annual income for inflation comes to Rs. 45,000/- (1,50,000 30/100)

• 1/3 for costs of expenses (1,50,000+45,000-1,95,000/3)Rs. 65,000/-

• Total amount after calculation comes to Rs. 50,70,000/- (39* 1,30,000/-

(1,50,000+45,000-65,000)

The Complainant has submitted that as per the formula mentioned above, the amount claimed under this head of loss of income comes to Rs. 50,00,000/- which is itself sufficient to bring the present complaint within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court apart from the quantum of compensation in other heads.

In order to put rest to the aforesaid controversy, we deem it appropriate to refer to section 47 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, reproduced hereunder as follows:

“47. Jurisdict