NIRMALA DEVI Vs. CHANDRAKANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts relevant to dispose of the instant Revision Petition are that the Complainant / Ms. Chandrakanta underwent sterilization operation on 06.02.1988, but, unfortunately, she thereafter lost her three children. On 29.01.2006 she approached Dr. Nirmala Sharma (Petitioner / Opposite Party). The Complainant alleged that the Opposite Party advised some tests and after examining the reports assured her that she can become a mother after a minor surgery of Tubal Recanalization. The doctor extracted money from her and on 17.03.2006 performed the said operation in a private nursing home (Kshetrapal Nursing Home). Thereafter also the Complainant did not conceive. However, the Opposite Party kept on giving medicines and assuring the Complainant that she would conceive. Thereafter she did not get periods for 5 months, and then she approached another gynecologist, Dr. Honey Gupta, who advised HSG test. Then it was noticed that the recanalization operation of the Complainant was not done at all. Being aggrieved by the misleading treatment given by the Opposite Party, the Complainant filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum ), Kota, Rajasthan.

(2.) Xxxx XXXX XXXX

(3.) The Opposite Party filed her written version and denied the entire allegations. The Opposite Party submitted that she is a government doctor and does not run a private clinic. She never performed any recanalization operation on the said patient. She treated the patient for her weakness and psychological problems.