STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH First Appeal No.1120 of 2022 Date of institution : 21.12.2022 Date of Reserve : 23.09.2024 Date of Decision : 16.10.2024 Delhi Nursing Home, near Street No.1, Bibiwala Road, Bathinda, through its Proprietor Dr.Sanjay Garg.

…….Appellant/Opposite Party No.2 Versus

1. Amarbir Singh Bandesh, son of Sh.Randhir Singh, resident of H.No.2, Khalsa Colony, Fatehgarh Churian, District Gurdaspur, Now at present : Kari Testakkei 13, 4314, Sandnes Norway, through its Power of Attorney Holder Sh.Amarjit Singh, son of Sh.Massa Singh, resident of Talwandi Bhungrian, P.O. Dosanjh, District Moga.

…….Respondent No.1/Complainant

2. The New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Divisional Office, The Mall Bathinda, Punjab.

3. Delhi Hair Clinic, near Street No.1, Bibiwala Road, Bathinda through its Properietor/Incharge.

…...Respondents No.2&3/Opposite Parties No.1&3 First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the Order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bathinda in CC No.138 of 2018.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present :-

F or the appellant : Sh.Sahil Khunger, Advocate For respondents No.1&3 : None For respondent No.2 : Sh.Pradeep Kumar, Advocate SIMARJOT KAUR, MEMBER This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party No.2 under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short ‘The Act’) being aggrieved by the impugned Order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bathinda (in short ‘the District Commission’) whereby the Complaint of the Complainant had been partly allowed.

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as had been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Complainant before the District Commission are that the Complainant Sh.Amarbir Singh Bandesha was residing at Norway. The Complaint was filed by him through one Sh.Amarjit Singh with duly authorized Power of Attorney. The Complainant was having lesser hair (baldness) on the center part of his head. He had approached OPs No.1&2 for the said purpose. They had assured the Complainant that they were having experience in the field of hair transplantation. After giving assurance, the Complainant had fixed his appointment. He was to pay an amount of Rs.36,000/- for hair transplantation. The Complainant had travelled to Bathinda from Norway for his said treatment. The OPs had examined the Complainant and some tests were got conducted upon him on 05.12.2017. The Complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.36,000/- with the OPs. They had obtained consent and signature of the Complainant on blank and pre-printed papers. The OPs had started his transplant treatment on 05.12.2017 and took a bunch of hair from right, left and back side of his head. They had harvested hairs at the center area of the head of the Complainant. The procedure of surgery/transplantation had taken 5½ hours. It was alleged by the Complainant that it was settled with the OPs that the hair would grow slowly. It was also alleged that the Complainant had noticed that the hair had not grown on both sides of the head from where the bunch of hair was taken for transplantation. The Complainant had telephonically contacted the OPs on 29.12.2017, one Mr.Deep Assistant of OPs told that “jo nikale hai oh to nahi aunde lekin duje ball os area nu kover kar lainde aaa”

4. The Complainant had travelled to India again on 05.01.2018 and approached the OPs, who categorically informed him that there would be no hair growth on the donor area. Thereafter, the Complainant had consulted to Dr. Prabhdeep Sohi, of Reviva Clini