ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 07.05.2023 Reserved on : 09.01.2026 Date of decision : 19.01.2026 Corporate Centre of SRL Limited, 635-L, Upper Ground Floor, Model Town, Ludhiana through its Managing Director/Manager/Authorized signatory.

…..Appellant/opposite party No.1 Versus

1. Upinder Singh son of Avtar Singh, resident of 840, Basant Avenue, Ludhiana.

2. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 1-2-23/16, 3^rd Floor, Dr.

Atma Ram Estate (TMC Building) Hyderabad Kijkatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana through Incharge Service through its Divisional Manager/Branch Manager/Divisional Office/Branch Office at Clock Tower, Near Bank of Baroda, GT Road, Ludhiana.(Deleted vide order dated 01.08.2023 ….Respondent/complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 23.08.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Ludhiana (Camp Court), in CC/85/2018 Quorum:-

Mr. H.P.S. Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Sukhandeep Singh, Advocate For respondent No.1 : Sh. Harpinder Singh,Auth. Representative For respondent No.2 : Deleted, vide order dt.01.08.2023 KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER The instant appeal has been filed by appellant/Opposite party No.1 against the order dated 23.08.2022 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana(Camp Court) (in short, “District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by complainant against opposite parties (in short ‘OPs’), under the Consumer Protection Act, was allowed while granting the following relief:-

“7. In the circumstances of the case, the complainant is entitled in lump sum to Rs.20,000/- due from the day of alleged test report along with interest @ 9% till payment. He is also entitled to lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses. OP No.1 is liable to make all these payments to the complainant. As regards insurance contract between OPs No.1 & 2, the same has no effect on the present case/complaint by the complainant. However, the OP1 will be free to enforce his right under the contract of insurance with OP2, available under law, if so desired by him……………..

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

3. Brief facts for the disposal of the appeal, as set out in the complaint, are that the complainant in the month of December 2017, availed the services of OP No.1 for conducting medical tests and after getting the report, he was shocked to know that his Triglycerides were high at danger point. He got depressed and rushed to his family doctor, who after verifying the said report advised him to get the medical test again. He was further told that if the said report issued by OP No.1 was right, then he would have got bed ridden. Accordingly, on the advice of his family doctor, the complainant again got conducted his medical tests from National Diagnostic Laboratory, Model Town Ludhiana and was found OK. The complainant approached OP No.1 and apprised about the said facts, thereafter, OP No.1 send its representative, who again collected the blood sample of the complainant and the test report was declared as OK. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1, the complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Commission and sought directions against the OPs to receive the payment as per rules Rs.95,000/- for mental torture and agony and Rs.1,000/- as cost of litigation.

4. Upon notice OP No.1 appeared and filed written reply, wherein it raised certain preliminary objections, which are not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity. On merits, OP No.1 stated that as per record, on 17.12.2017, the sample of the complainant was drawn for testing under HCP Plus test package. The sample was registered under Accession No.0037QL005255 and accordin