Complaint filed on: 01-01-2022

                                                      Disposed on: 05-08-2022

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU

#201, 202, 1^st Floor, Indian Red Cross Building Complex,

Ashoka Road, Tumakuru-572 101. 

DATED THIS THE 5^th DAY OF August, 2022

PRESENT

SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, B.Com., LLM., PRESIDENT

SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc. (Agri), LLB., MBA., MEMBER

SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., LLB. (Spl)., LADY MEMBER

CC.No.01/2022

Smt. G.Mahadevamma W/o Thimmareddy K.G.

A/a 63 years, R/at 8^th Cross,

Vidhya Nagara, Tumakuru City.

………Complainant

(By Sri.T.R.Manjunatha, Advocate)

V/s

The Managing Director

Sri.Siddaganga Hospital Pvt. Ltd.,

Siddaganga Hospital and Research Center,

Dr. Sree Sree Shivakumara Swamiji Road,

(B.H.Road), Tumakuru-572 102.

………Opposite Party

 (By Sri. H.B.Gurukiran, Advocate)

 :ORDER:

SRI.KUMARA.N., MEMBER

This complaint was filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to direct the OP to pay Rs.211456=00 with interest @ 18 % pa, from 05-09-2020 till its realization, along with Rs 500000=00 towards deficiency and negligence act, caused mental harassment to the complainant.

2.         The OP is The Managing Director, Sri.Siddaganga Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Siddaganga Hospital and Research Center, Dr. Sree Sree Shivakumara Swamiji Road, B.H. Road, Tumakuru- 572102. (herein after called as Op).

3.         It is the case of the complainant that, during August 2020, the complainant suffered from COVID-19 and admitted to the District Government Hospital, Tumakuru and later seeing critical condition of the complainant, on 30-08-2020 the District Government Hospital Tumakuru referred the complainant to the OP’s hospital under ABARK beneficiary scheme, as there was no ICU facility at the District Government Hospital at that relevant time.  Thereafter, the complainant admitted to the OP hospital as an inpatient and treatment given to the complainant by the OP, in turn the complainant recovered from COVID-19 accordingly, discharged on 05.09.2020.  It is further case of the complainant that the OP had collected Rs.2,11,546/- forcibly even though there is a direction from the State Government to provide free treatment to those people who referred by the Government Hospitals under the ABARK beneficiary scheme.  Therefore, the complainant enquired about the said amount, but the OP gave evasive reply.  Hence, the complainant issued legal notice to the OP calling upon them to repay the amount collected by the complainant with interest, but the OP replied through their advocate and denied to pay the said amount.  Hence,  this complaint.

4.        After the complaint registered, Notice served to the OP, Sri. H.B.Gurukiran, Advocate filed power to on behalf of the OP and filed version.

5.      The OP in the version contending that the complainant was admitted as a COVID - 19 patient and taken treatment from 30.08.2021 to 05.09.2021 as an inpatient and he was not referred as a patient under the ABARK (Ayushman Bharat Arogya Karnataka).  The OP further contended that the relative of complainant at the time of admission opted for the cash treatment accordingly collecting the required admission charges, complainant admitted as an inpatient and treatment given, after the recovery from COVID-19, the complainant discharged by collecting treatment charges as agreed by the complainant. The OP further contended that being aware of the fact to make an unlawful gain; the complainant filed this false complaint even though she got good treatment and service.  Hence, there is no deficiency of service on their part.  On these among other grounds, the OP denied other averments made in the complaint and prays to dismiss the complaint.  

6.      Both parties have filed their affidavit evidence. The Complainant produced 20 documents, which were marked as Ex.P1 to P20 and the OP documents marked as Ex.R1 to R4.

7.       We have heard the arguments of both side counsels and also gone through the written arguments filed by both parties.

8.       The points that would arise for determination are as under:

1)      Whether the complainant proves that there is a

deficiency in service / unfair trade practice on the

part of OP?

2)      Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought for?  

9.       Our findings aforesaid points are as under:

Point No.1: Partly affirmative

Point No.2: As per the final order

:R E A S O N S:

Point Nos.1 and 2:

10.     The complainant counsel argued that the OP forcefully collected Rs 211456=00 from the complainant, even though the complainant referred by the District Government Hospital Tumakuru under ABARK (Ayushman Bharat Arogya Karnataka) as there was no availability of ICU facility at that time. Further submit that Complainant referred as COVID - 19 positive, the OP collected Rs 4000=00 towards COVID – 19, test and even after several request the OP not given the said test report and made the complainant to suffer mentally, and prayed to allow the complaint.

11.       The OP Counsel argued that complainant admitted as an inpatient on 30-08-2021, and opted for cash treatment, but not as a beneficiary under ABARK (Ayushman Bharat Arogya Karnataka) scheme, accordingly the complainant given treatment for COVID -19, and discharged on 05-09-2021 by collecting hospital charges as agreed by the complainant and the Complainant filed complaint before the Deputy commissioner Tumakuru, before filed this complaint. Further submitted that as per the ABARK terms of references for private hospital empanelled for management and treatment of COVID – 19, if any disputes regarding ToR, will first Appealed to the Additional Chief Secretary, Health and Family Welfare GOK and if any Grievance Redressal, shall be by the Grievances committee and the Empanelment and Disciplinary committee of SAST, not the District Consumer disputes Redressal Commission, hence prayed to dismiss the complainant.

12.     The Complainant counsel produced Ex P1,Legal Notice Dated 15-11-2020, Ex P2, Postal acknowledgements, Ex P3 Postal Track, Ex P4, Reply Notice of OP, Ex P5 RPAD, Ex P6 Certificate Dated 26-09-2020 by the Medical Officer of the Primary Health Centre, stating that Complainant COVID – 19 test Positive, Ex P7 Referral out Form, Ex P8 Annexure of District Hospital, Ex 10 Enquiry Report  of District Surgeon, Ex 10(a) Letter of OP to District Surgeon, Ex P11 OP letter to District Health Officer, Ex P12 OP Letter to District Surveillance Officer Tumakuru, Ex P 13 OPD slip of Complainant at District Hospital, Ex P 14 Complaint dated 14-09-2020 of Complainant to the Deputy Commissioner, Ex P15 Complaint Letter to the Deputy Commissioner Tumakuru, Ex P16 Complaint Letter to the OP, Ex P17 Complaint Letter to the Deputy Commissioner Tumakuru, Ex P 18 to P 20 OP records and bills.

13.     The OP counsel produced Ex R1, the complainant, complaint dated 14-09-2020 to the Deputy Commissioner Tumakuru. Ex R2 Enquiry Report of the District Surgeon, Ex R3 ICMR Copy of Record, Ex R4 SAST guidelines.

14.     The Ex P6, Ex P7, Ex P8 and Ex P13 of the Complainant proves that, the complainant was COVID – 19 positive patient, admitted to the District Government Hospital Tumakuru on 24-08-2020 for treatment and on 30-08-2020, referred the complainant to the higher centre for the treatment. The Ex P18 to Ex P20 proves that the on 30-08-2020 at 6.19 AM, the complainant admitted as inpatient in OP hospital for COVID – 19 treatments, accordingly treatment given by the OP hospital, on 05-09-2020 the complainant discharged by collecting hospital / treatment charges of Rs 211546=00.

15. Ex P10 and P10(a) were copy of the District Surgeon Tumakuru, enquiry report, where in stated as the complainant not produced referral form and documents related to the ABARK beneficiary at the time of admission to the OP hospital.

16.     The OP contention of, this commission not having jurisdiction / authority to resolve this complaint,

 (a) According to Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (“the Act”), deficiency is any sort of fault, imperfection, shortcoming or defect in the feature, quality, amount, nature, worth, authenticity, capacity and standard which is obligatory to be maintained and regulated as per the laws and statutes in function ..

 (b) ‘Unfair Trade Practice’ under the 2019 Act, Section 2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 defines ‘unfair trade practice’. The definition of ‘unfair trade practice’ has been broadened to include practices such as:

• Manufacturing or offering spurious goods for sale or adopting deceptive practices for providing service,
• Not issuing proper cash memo or bill for the services rendered and the good sold,
• refund the consideration taken thereof within the time period stipulated in Refusing to withdraw, take back or discontinue defective goods and services and the bill or within 30 days if there is no such provision in the bill,
• Disclosing personal information of the consumer to any other person not in accordance with the prevailing laws.

In this case the complainant filed against the OP regarding the deficiency of service, but not disputed regarding ToR of the OP and The consumer Protection Act 2019 empowered this commission to register and resolve the complaint accordingly by considering the discussions in para 16 (a) and (b), this commission is passing the order.

17.     On 15-07-2022.the OP produced Government of Karnataka Notification dated: 23.06.2020 No.HFW 228 ACS 2020, wherein,

1. Package rates for COVID-19 patients referred by the Publish health Authorities shall be as follows:

1. General Ward                                Rs.5,200/-
2. HDU                                            Rs.7,000/-
3. Isolation ICU without ventilator    Rs.8,500/-
4. Isolation ICU with ventilator         Rs.10,000/-

(b)     Package rate ceilings for private COVID-19 patients directly admitted by PHPs making cash payment (non insurance) shall be as follows:  

1. General Ward                                Rs.10,000/-
2. HDU                                            Rs.12,000/-
3. Isolation ICU without ventilator    Rs.15,000/-
4. Isolation ICU with ventilator         Rs.25,000/-

18.     The allegation of the Complainant, that the OP hospital given paper statement that COVID – 19 patients referred by the government hospitals treated free of costs and the complainant even though referred by the District Government hospital to the OP hospital under ABARK (Ayushman Bharat Arogya Karnataka), the OP charged and collected Rs 211546=00 forcibly, towards COVID – 19 treatment, to prove this the complainant not produced any evidence / documents that the complainant was beneficiary under ABARK and the OP hospital claimed the said amount from the Government and EX P9 was the OP statement in Prajapragathi daily news paper, dated 12-09-2020, which was after the seven days of the complainant discharged / taken the treatment i.e. 05-09-2020 in the OP hospital, hence rejecting the prayer of the complainant to direct the OP to pay forcibly collected amount of Rs 211546/collected towards treatment charges.

19.     The complainant alleged that, on 31-08-2020 the OP collected Rs 4000-00 towards COVID – 19 test (Rs 1500/ towards consumables & Rs 2500/ towards RT-PCR) even though the complainant referred by the Government Hospital Tumakuru, where as the complainant undergone COVID – 19 test on 26-09-2020, the result was positive (Ex P6),accordingly, the complainant admitted to the Government Hospital for treatment and in turn Government Hospital referred the complainant to the further treatment, but even after collecting said amount the OP not given the result in spite of the of the many requests, and the complainant given representation in this regard to the Deputy commissioner Tumakuru, but the OP not given reports, to prove that complainant produced Ex P20,where in on 31-08-2020 the OP Charged Rs1425-00 and Rs 2075-00 and the complainant at the time of discharge paid the said amount i.e. Rs 3500-00 to the OP, the Ex P16, complainant letter dated 12-01-2021 requesting the OP to give test reports, Ex P17, the complainant letter Dated 23-02-2021 to the Deputy Commissioner, Tumakuru in this regard, and Ex P11 & P12, the OP letter Dated 07-07-2021 to the District Health Officer and District Surveillance officer, Tumakuru, stated that, the complainant already taken COVID – 19 treatment in Government Hospital, and for, further treatment, admitted in our hospital, on referring ICMR status, the complainant was COVID-19 positive, hence  COVID – 19 test not conducted, but invoice generated and regretted for this, we will return the amount to the complainant. This revels that the OP had the knowledge of the Complainant that the complainant referred by the Government Hospital. In this case, the complainant even though referred by the Government Hospital, the OP charged as per para above of 17(b) 3 and 4, instead of 17(a) 3 and 4,  I.e. Rs 25000/ instead of Rs 10000=00 on 30-08-2020 and Rs 15000/day instead of Rs 8500/day, for 6 days (from 31-08-2020 to 05-09-2020) charged totally Rs 109250=00 instead of Rs 61000=00 and collected from the complainant. The OP collected Rs 48250=00 excess and Rs.3,500/- towards conducting COVID-19  test from the complainant, but the OP not conducted the said test and furnished test reports, which leads to deficiency in service on the part of OP. In the above discussion this commission is in the opinion of even though the complainant prayed the compensation of Rs 500000 towards mental harassment, not produced sufficient evidence for the same and it is appropriate to award Rs 10000=00 compensation and Rs 10000=00 litigation cost and directing the OP to pay Rs 48250-00 (Excess Collected) and Rs 3500=00 (Collected for COVID – 19 Test)  totally  Rs 51750=00 along with interest @ 9 pa from 06-09-2020, Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;

                                             :O R D E R:

The complaint is allowed in part with costs.

The OP is directed to pay Rs.51,750/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% PA from 06.09.2020 till realization.

The OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation costs.

The OP is further directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of knowledge/receipt of this order.

Furnish the copy of order to the complainant and opposite parties at free of cost.