STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN Date of Admission: 14.05.2019 Date of Final Hearing: 09.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 24.02.2026 SC/5/A/185/2019

1. Sh. Neeraj Sharma aged about 30 years’ S/o Sh. S.B. Sharma R/o L-113, Shivalik Nagar, BHEL, Ranipur District Haridwar

2. Smt. Deepshikha Sharma W/o Sh. Neeraj Sharma R/o L-113, Shivalik Nagar, BHEL, Ranipur District Haridwar (Through: Sh. K.R. Uniyal, Advocate)

…… Appellants Versus

1. Raja Ram Hospital-Maternity & Trauma Centre through its Director Dr. Sarita Gupta R/o K-6, Shivalik Nagar, Ranipur District Haridwar

2. Dr. Sarita Gupta R/o K-6, Shivalik Nagar, Ranipur District Haridwar (Through: Sh. Parveen Kumar, Advocate)

…… Respondents Coram:

Ms. Kumkum Rani, President Mr. B.S. Manral, Member

ORDER

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 18.02.2019 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Haridwar (hereinafter to be referred as “The District Commission”) in consumer complaint No. 143 of 2014, styled as Sh. Neeraj Sharma and another Vs. Raja Ram Hospital-Maternity & Trauma Centre and another, wherein and whereby the consumer complaint filed by the appellants / complainants was dismissed.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in brief, are, as such that the appellant No. 1 / complainant No. 1 – Sh. Neeraj Sharma got his wife, i.e., appellant No. 2 / complainant No. 2 – Smt. Deepshikha Sharma treated at respondent No. 1 / opposite party No. 1 – Raja Ram Hospital-Maternity & Trauma Centre under the supervision of respondent No. 2 / opposite party No. 2 – Dr. Sarita Gupta, on payment of requisite fee / charges from time to time. The appellant No. 2 was pregnant and the respondent No. 2 assured that the appellant No. 2 would be properly treated and that the hospital is fully equipped with all the required facilities, so as to deal with any problem / emergency situation, which may arise during pregnancy period. Thereafter, the appellants availed the services of respondent No. 2 and as per the advice of respondent No. 2, got the check-up of appellant No. 2 done on different dates, i.e., 10.06.2013; 29.06.2013 and 02.07.2013 and also got conducted her tests, report whereof was told to be normal. Later on, the appellant No. 2 visited hospital on 30.07.2013; 10.08.2013; 12.08.2013 and 13.08.2013, whereupon the respondent No. 2 told that everything is normal and advised to get the ultrasound of appellant No. 2 done from Dhanwantri Ultrasound & X-ray Centre, Ranipur More, Haridwar and after seeing the ultrasound report, the respondent No. 2 told that the condition of fetus is fine and advised to come for further consultation on 31.08.2013. For routine check-up, the respondent No. 2 was also consulted on 07.09.2013 and 01.10.2013, who after checking the appellant No. 2 told that the test report etc. are normal and also told the condition of fetus as fine. In the night intervening 26/27.10.2013, the appellant No. 2 felt abdomen pain, whereupon the appellant No. 1 took appellant No. 2 to respondent No. 2 on 27.10.2013, i.e., very next day. The respondent No. 2 got the check-up of appellant No. 2 done in emergency and prescribed medicine for five days’, stating there is no need to fear and that the condition of fetus is fine. However, on the next day, i.e., 28.10.2013, the appellant No. 2 again suffered pain, whereupon the respondent No. 2 advised certain tests. On going through the test reports on dated 31.10.2013, the respondent No. 2 told that the reports are alright / normal and asked to come on 02.11.2013 for test and routine check-up. 3. It was also stated that after tests and check-up of appellant No. 2, the respondent No. 2 continued to tell that the condition of the fetus is normal and advised the appellant No. 2 to consume prescribed medicines and assured that normally during the pregnancy period, the a wom