PRITPAL SINGH Vs. ARYA MUNI AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Pritpal Singh s/o Shri Joginder Singh, has filed this appeal against the order dated 13.2.1997, passed by the District Forum, Amritsar, praying to set aside the impugned order and to allow complaint. Evidently the complaint was dismissed leaving to bear their own costs.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant/appellant met with an accident in 1995, as a result of which both of his legs were badly fractured. The complainant was hospitalised in Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Amritsar. The Orthopaedic Surgeon advised operation by way of affixing Titanium plates for refixing the fractured bones of the legs. The complainant purchased the Titanium plates from the opposite party for Rs.42,323.20. Three Titanium plates were affixed in the legs of the appellant-complainant by the treating Surgeon. It is alleged that the treating doctors were fully satisfied after affixing plates, with healing process and the complainant was discharged from the hospital on 18.9.1995. It so happened that on 23.9.1996, the complainant felt pain in his left leg and went to Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, where the doctor on duty diagnosed "broken plates in the left leg" and advised X-ray. A clear crack in the plates was seen in the X-ray (Skiagram ). It is alleged that the plates had broken due to its inferior quality and again advised fresh operation by affixing fresh Titanium plates. The grouse of the complainant is that the Titanium plates sold to him by the opposite party were of inferior quality. At the time of purchase of the aforesaid Titanium plates, the opposite party assured the complainant that the goods were of genuine titanium imported goods made of best quality of steel having unlimited life and strength as the opposite party was the authorised dealer/ distributor for the goods supplied.

(3.) It is alleged by the complainant that he has spent more than Rs.70,000/- on the purchase of the Titanium plates and operations, he suffered the risk of second operation for no fault of his but due to the deficiency of service by supplying the defective goods of inferior quality on part of the opposite party. Hence, he filed the complaint before the District Forum to get his grievance redressed.