IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Hearing: 15.01.2025 Date of Decision:25.02.2025 FIRST APPEAL NO. 169/2016 IN THE MATTER OF M/S DELHI HEART & LUNG INSTITUTE

3-MM II, PANCHKUIAN ROAD NEW DELHI -110055.

…APPELLANT (Through: KOHLI & SOBTI, Advocates)

Versus SH. MAHENDER SON OF LATE SH. JAI PRAKASH RESIDENT OF H.NO. N-62/474, T-HUTS, NEAR PATRACHAR VIDYALAYA TIMARPUR, DELHI - 110054.

…RESPONDENT (Through: Mr. Varun Kumar Sharma, Advocate)

WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 120/2016 IN THE MATTER OF SH. MAHENDER SON OF LATE SH. JAI PRAKASH RESIDENT OF H.NO. N-62/474, T-HUTS, NEAR PATRACHAR VIDYALAYA TIMARPUR, DELHI - 110054.

…APPELLANT (Through: Mr. Varun Kumar Sharma, Advocate)

Versus M/S DELHI HEART & LUNG INSTITUTE

3-MM II, PANCHKUIAN ROAD NEW DELHI -110055.

…RESPONDENT (Through: KOHLI & SOBTI, Advocates)

CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE)

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, PRESIDENT JUDGMENT

1. By this Common Judgment, we shall dispose of the present appeal FA-

169/2016 alongwith connected appeals FA-120/2016 arising out of the common Impugned Order dated 19.01.2016 in Complaint Case No. 169/2014 titled ‘Sh. Mahender Vs Delhi Heart & Lung Institute” passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-Central, Kashmere Gate, Delhi wherein the Complainant was as follows:

1) Mr. Mahender And the Opposite Party was as follows :

1) Delhi Heart and Lung Institute

2. FA-120/2016 titled ‘Mr. Mahender Vs Delhi Heart & Lung Institute’ has been preferred by the by the Complainant-Mr. Mahender seeking enhancement of compensation.

3. For the sake of clarity, the parties have been hereinafter referred to as per their denominations in FA No.169/2016.

4. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present Appeals as per the District Commission record are:

“The darker side of commercialization which has permeated the medical services in our country is perhaps be illustrated by the complaint before us. We are astounded by the facts revealed in this complaint where a person who was “brought dead” to the OP hospital, which is a prestigious medical institute in the Capital City of Delhi, was put through a resuscitation procedure and bills raised before the release of the body. For once, we are not relying on the story put forth by the complainant. The story made out by the OP hospital itself shows the highly unethical manner adopted by it in order to earn money dishonestly. The story put forth by the OP which is contained in the preliminary objection of the written statement filed by it reads as under:

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION That the present complaint is an abuse of the process of the court and is intended merely to harass and blackmail and tarnish the goodwill of the answering respondent and its doctors for unjust enrichment. The fact of the matter is that on 22.11.2013 Sh. Jai Prakash was received in the emergency ward of the hospital at 11.25 PM in collapsed state from Sant Parmanand Hospital. At the time of presentation to emergency the patient was already clinically dead and he was pulse less with no spontaneous respiratory 12.00 AM; a 'Brought Dead" certificate was also issued to him depicting the actual time of diagnosis of death by the Doctor on duty as 11.29 PM, which would necessarily be soon after the time of arrival and not at the end of resuscitative measure. The bills for the ‘Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation " listing all items used in the said procedure were raised in a total sum of Rs.13,602/- (Rs.9946/- and Rs.3656/-) and the same were paid by the said Sh. Umesh Kumar. In view of the above factual matrix, the Complainant is malafidely and dishonestly feigning ignorance of the death of the patient at the time of arrival at the emergency of the hospital and make malicious and false allegations merely because of department reimbursement policies and non-reimbursement of the expenses by the concerned department. The conduct of the Complainant is