INSCOL TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL Vs. RAVI GHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U. T. , Chandigarh [hereinafter, for short, referred to as District Forum-II], dated 18.8.2004 in Complaint Case No.406 of 2003, Dr. Ravi Ghai V/s. INSCOL Tertiary Care Hospital and Others.

(2.) The complaint in brief is that Dr. Ravi Ghai and his wife Dr. Sarita Ghai took his mother to the O. P. Hospital when she suffered cardio pulmonary arrest at about 1.30 a. m. on the night intervening 22/23.6.2003. They took her in their car to the O. P. Hospital where she was declared 'brought dead' by the doctor on examination. The complainant hired an ambulance of the O. P. Hospital to shift the dead body to his residence at Panchkula. The O. Ps. assured the complainant that due care and respect will be shown while transporting the dead body to his residence. It was also assured that the dead body will be covered with neat and clean bed sheets and it would be handled properly by two attendants/employees of the O. P. It was also assured that the driver would drive the ambulance carefully showing all respect to the dead body and the deceased family. However, the complainant, his wife and other members of the family of the complainant were shocked to see that no respect to the dead body, as promised, was shown. It is averred that there was only one attendant of O. P. Hospital, who tried to shift the dead body to the ambulance but since he could not handle the dead body properly the complainant and his family members had to lend a helping hand. It is also alleged that the driver of the ambulance rashly and negligently hit the ambulance into the car of the complainant's wife, which was parked in front of the O. P. Hospital and when the complainant pointed out this to O. P. No.3 (driver) he misbehaved, insulted and humiliated the complainant by blurting out that "aisa TO HOTA REHTA HAI". This remark, the complainant averred, injured the feelings of the complainant and his family members. It is also alleged that the driver of the ambulance i. e. , O. P. No.3 was not holding a valid driving licence and did not have adequate experience of driving. Terming the conduct of the O. Ps. as deficiency in service, the complainant has filed the complaint praying for the following reliefs: (a) Payment of Rs.50,000/- for not providing assures services and causing humiliation, tension, mental pain, suffering, inconvenience and hurting the sentiments etc. (b) Payment of Rs.11,000/- as litigation cost.

(3.) In their version the O. Ps. did not deny that the mother of the complainant was brought in dead. It was also not denied that the complainant hired the ambulance of the O. P. for a payment of Rs.500/- for carrying the dead body to the complainant's house. It is, however, stated that on knowing about the death of his mother, the complainant lost control and balance of mind. It is stated that the dead body was shifted with due respect and extra care in the ambulance to the residence of the complainant. It is also stated that O. P. No.3 is not a driver but is a supervisor in the O. P. Hospital.