SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 3629

IN THE

ASSAM STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT GUWAHATI


C.C. NO. 1/2016


Shyam Sundar Gupta, (Student)

Assam Engineering College (A.E.C.)

Jalukbari, Dist- Kamrup (M)

Guwahati- 781013, Assam

....Complainant

-Versus-

1. Addl. Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Assam

Health & Family Welfare Department, Dispur, Guwahati

(Deleted as per Order dated 31-10-2022)

2. Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam

Health & Family Welfare Department, Dispur, Guwahati

3. Registrar of Medical Council, Medical Council of

Registration, Hengerabari, Guwahati-36

(Deleted as per Order dated 10-11-2017)

4. Superintendent of Assam Medical College & Hospital

Dibrugarh, Assam, Pin- 786002

5. Dr. (Prof) Partha Pratim Dutta

Department of Plastic Surgery

Assam Medical College & Hospital, Dibrugarh

Pin No. 786002

.... Opposite Parties


For the complainant: Mr. A. Bordoloi, Advocate

For the Opposite Party Nos. 2 & 4: None appeared

For the Opposite Party No. 5: Mr. N. K. Kalita, Advocate


Date of Hearing: 02-04-2026

Date of Judgment: 05.06.2026.


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE PRESIDENT MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI

THE HON'BLE MEMBER MR. CHANDAN DAS (JUDICIAL)

THE HON'BLE MEMBER MR. TAPAS KUMAR GHOSH

Petitioner Advocates:Mrs. M. Borah ,Respondent Advocate: Mr. B. Upamanya,Mr. B. Upamanya,Mr. B. Upamanya,Mr. N. K. Kalita

JUDGMENT

BY HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M. NANDI,

Heard Mr. A. Bordoloi, learned counsel, appearing for the complainant. Also heard Mr. N. K. Kalita, learned counsel, appearing for the opposite party No. 5. None appeared for the remaining opposite parties i.e. opposite party Nos. 2 and 4.

2. The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on account of deficiency in service and medical negligence on the part of the opposite parties. It is pertinent to say here that subsequently during trial the opposite party Nos. 1 and 3 had been deleted from the array of the opposite parties vide order of this Commission dated 31-10-2022 and 10-11-2017 respectively.

3. The brief fact of the case is that the complainant was a student at the relevant point of time who was pursuing his studies in engineering degree in civil branch at Assam Engineering College at Guwahati. In the month of December, 2014, he had suffered from a nasal infection at the tip of his nose. Thereafter, the complainant went to Gauhati Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) wherein he was treated for about one and half months but with no such substantial improvement on his infection.

4. Thereafter, in the month of March, 2015, the complainant went to his home town Digboi and visited Assam Medical College and Hospital (AMCH), Dibrugarh for further treatment as outdoor patient in OPD department on 14-3-2015, 16-3-2015 and 23-3-2015 but he did not get any better result. After that he was referred to the department of plastic surgery and then he went to OPD of the said department on 16-4-2015 vide registration No. 15040796996. After examination by the doctor he was diagnosed with Nasal Haemangioma and was sent to the department of plastic surgery.

5. On the same day i.e. 16-4-2015, the complainant was injected with ‘SETROL’ injection in the tip of his nose by Dr. (Prof) Partha Pratim Dutta (opposite party No. 5). After that he immediately felt a painful burning sensation in his nose. Thereafter, when the complainant again consulted with Dr. Partha Pratim Dutta, then he told the complainant that a therapy has been given to him consisting five injection which must be given in an interval of fifty days and the effect of the injection would last for ten days. However, after few hours the nose of the complainant turned slightly black and was swollen. Subsequently, after ten days his nose became dark black, mucus and pus began to discharge from it. Having seen the condition of his nose, he disclosed the fact to his parents and they decided to go to Patna.

6. In his complaint, the complainant further pleaded that in Patna they visited the chamber of Dr. Brijlall. The doctor having seen his condition was shocked by the treatment towards the complainant. He felt very sorry and stated that the complainant was rather experimented upon on the name of treatment and the diagnosis (Nasal Haemangioma) was wrong. Then, he referred the complainant to skin specialist doctor. On 7-5-2015, he visited one skin specialist and the reaction of the said doctor was also same and disclosed that the injection usually pushes on legs and is not meant for nose. He also stated that from a small infection, the complainant had suffered two dangerous diseases i.e. Nasal Necrosis and Canarum Oris resulting in permanent disfiguration of the nose of the complainant. On such condition, there was no such treatment except to undergo Rhinoplasty Surgery ( nose reconstruction) by a Plastic Surgeon. Thereafter, the doctor gave some medicines so that the infection got controlled.

7. On 9-5-2015, the complainant came back to Guwahati from Patna. After few days the situation became worse, nose skin got decayed and also burnt like smell came out from it. Thereafter, the complainant and his parents decided to go to Apollo Hospital at Chennai. On 15-5-2015 they went to Chennai and consulted with plastic surgeon Dr. M.N. Kumaresan in Apollo Hospital, Chennai. He also informed them that the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top