Topic 2. Collect newspaper/magazine clipping of five cases filed by consumer in the consumer court.
Find out the rights violated, and the redressal mechanism used. What was the outcome of each
case?
While deciding on a consumer complaint, the NCDRC has recently asked
LIC to pay a fine of Rs 2.5 lakhs to the father of a girl in Maharashtra.
The person had taken the Jeevan Aadhaar policy of LIC for his daughter
suffering from Down’s syndrome. LIC had earlier refused to pay the
assured amount to him even after he paid all his premiums in full.
People buy goods and services an inevitable process of their daily lives. We all need
food clothing and shelter, which forms the basic necessities of our lives. And with the
growing dependency on technology, it has also formed in some shape or form, a basic
necessity. The world revolves around technology and the internet. While purchasing
goods or services, you can come upon various problems from the one who delivers
your goods or the service provider or an online vendor or anyone else.
Here are the top 10 Consumer Cases In India that saw justice prevail in the side of
the consumer. For more information, we present you this unique blog.
1. Corporate Bodies can be sued under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA)
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation (KPTC) v Ashok Iron Works Private
Limited
How the factual matter of the case arose
The case dates back to the last century, when in 1991, Ashok Iron Works, a private
company that manufactures iron applied for obtaining electricity from the state’s
power generation company – the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation
(hereinafter KTPC) for commencing its iron production. However, despite paying
charges and obtaining confirmation for the supply of 1500 KVA energy in February
1991, the actual supply did not begin until ten months later, in November 1991. This
delay led to incurring of losses by the private company. This prompted a complaint to
the Belgaum Consumer Dispute Forum and later Karnataka High Court, under the
Consumer Protection Act 1986 for the delay in supply of electricity.
Legal Arguments by KPTC
Commercial supply not covered under the act – The major
argument relied on by the power generation company KTPC was
that the complaint was not maintainable since the Consumer
Protection Act 1986 excludes commercial supply of goods. The
applicant company was engaged in manufacturing of iron, and
hence, intended to use the electricity for commercial consumption,
which is excluded under the act.
A private company is not a consumer – The other argument
by KTPC was that the complaint is not maintainable because the
complainant is not a `person’ under Section 2(1)(m) of the Act,
1986. This section defines who can be included as a consumer, and
because it didn’t contain “a company incorporated under
Companies Act” – the applicant company is not a consumer.
Supreme Court Ruling in the case
“Includes – is an inclusive definition” – Supreme Court
relied on the ruling in Dilworth v. Commissioner of Stamps, where
Lord Watson said that the word “include” is very generally used in
interpretation clauses in order to enlarge the meaning of words or
phrases occurring in the body of the statute; It may be equivalent to
“mean and include”. The court also relied on other acts such as the
General Clauses Act that includes a private company within the
purview of the definition of a “person”. Hence, Ashok Iron Works
Private Company was held to be a person.
Supply doesn’t mean sale – The Supreme Court relied on
another case – Southern Petrochemical Industries, where it was
held that supply is not equivalent to a sale. Therefore, the supply of
electricity by the KPTC to a consumer would be covered
under Section 2(1)(o) being `service’ and if the supply of electrical
energy to a consumer is not provided in time as is agreed upon,
then under Section (2)(1)(g), there may be a case for deficiency in
service. Thus, the clause stating “supply” of goods for commercial
purpose would not apply.
Thus, the court allowed the complaint on the two grounds that the applicant – Ashok
Iron Works Private Limited, can sue as a person, and that supply of electricity, if
found deficient can be a fit ground for claiming compensation. The Supreme Court
sent the case back to District Forum for retrial on these grounds.
2. Medical services fall within the scope of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA)
Indian Medical Association v V.P. Shantha and others
The factual background of the case
The cases arise as a writ petition was filed by the Indian Medical Association seeking
the Supreme Court to declare that the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter “Act”)
doesn’t apply to the medical profession.
Questions involved in the case –
1. Whether a medical practitioner can be regarded as rendering
‘service’ under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
2. If a medical service is rendered for free, will it be covered under the
Act?
Arguments by Indian Medical Association –
Reliance on cases which state that such medical service by a government
healthcare system is not a “service” – It has been held that the payment of
direct or indirect taxes by the public does not constitute “constitute “consideration”
paid for hiring the services rendered in the Government hospitals. It has also been
held that contribution made by a Government employee in the Central Government
Health Scheme or such other similar Scheme does not make him a “consumer”
within the meaning of the Act.
Medical professionals are governed by a separate Code of Medical Ethics –
medical practitioners are governed by the provisions of the Indian Medical Council
Act, 1956 and the Code of Medical Ethics made by the Medical Council of India. In
the matter of professional liability, professions differ from other occupations for the
reason that professions operate in spheres where success cannot be achieved in every
case and very often success or failure depends upon factors beyond the professional
man’s control. Thus, since medical negligence can be dealt with by medical experts in
their own jurisdiction, the Consumer Protection Act shouldn’t apply.
There is no expert in medical science in the Consumer Courts –
The Consumer Protection mechanism provides that there must be experts in
accountancy, law, economics, industry etc, but doesn’t mention “medical science”,
therefore, the act intended to exclude medical profession from its ambit.
Reasoning of the final verdict – Medical professionals are covered under the Consumer
Protection Act
The medical practitioner and a patient carries within it a certain
degree of mutual confidence and trust and, therefore, the services
rendered by the medical practitioner can be regarded as services of
personal nature, but it is not a contract (such as that between a
buyer and seller) and hence, the exclusionary word “contract of
personal service” would not apply. Thus, the receiver of the medical
help is a consumer.
The Court held that District, State and National Consumer Fora can
summon experts in the field of medicine, examine evidence and
generally act to protect the interest of consumers. Thus, there is no
legal bar or deficiency in examining medical profession cases by
consumer courts.
Doctors and hospitals who render service without any charge
whatsoever to every person availing the service would not fall
within the ambit of “service”.
In a government hospital, where services are provided free of
charge – the Consumer Protection act would not apply. If however,
there are paying customers and well as service being provided for
free to the poor, it shall be covered as a service under the act.
If the insurance policy company pays for the treatment, it is on
behalf of the customer, and hence, it will be covered under the Act.
3. Medical services should be rendered in accordance with the law
(Dr.) Arvind Shah vs Kamlaben Kushwaha
The factual background of the case
The case arises as a result of the death of complainant Kamlaben Kushwaha’s 20-
year-old son due to medical negligence by the petitioner doctor. The mother alleged
that the medicines prescribed had no relation to the ailment – malaria, whereas the
actual cause of death was said to be pulmonary oedema. The doctor alleged that he
did not diagnose the deceased for malaria, as pathological tests are necessary to
establish that conclusively, and no such report was made available to him. While the
State Commission found the doctor guilty of medical negligence and awarded a
compensation of 5 lac rupees with interest at 9%, the case was appealed by the doctor
in the National Commission.
Basic question that the National Commission sought to answer –
– If and in what circumstance can a doctor be held guilty of medical negligence
– Appropriate compensation for a case of medical negligence
Reasoning and Decision of the National Commission – Failure to write a prescription
gives rise to guilt under medical negligence
The National Commission places reliance on the codes, ethics and
practices of the medical professionals regulatory bodies and notes
that every doctor while treating a patient, even outpatients, is
under a responsibility to record basic health parameters such as
blood pressure, temperature, pulse rate etc. This is provided under
guidelines of the Medical Council of India as well.
This record must also include brief summary of the symptoms, past
illnesses. This is a primary duty of disclosure owed by the physician
to the patient. Thus, failure to record such details constitutes
medical negligence.
The national commission also highlighted that the doctor is guilty
for deficiency in service, due to his failure to record the patient’s
conditions and issue a medical prescription.
The national commission also notes the denial of the doctor of
having written the prescription served as evidence in the first place,
but later accepts treating the patient. This conduct, in the language
of the commission, does not reflect professional conduct worthy of
a medical practitioner.
Considering the socio-economic conditions in India, it is necessary
to nurture doctor-patient relationships based on trust. Having a
ready prescription also helps the patient consult another doctor, in
case the initially prescribed line of curative medicine does not
work. Similarly, it helps the medical practitioner establish that due
care was taken according to prescribed standards in the field of
medicine.
The Commission noted that while the doctor is indisputably held
guilty of medical negligence by not issuing a proper prescription,
there is no material available on record to conclusively establish the
negligence of the doctor with the cause of death. The medicines
prescribed were not related to the established cause of death –
pulmonary oedema. As a result, the amount of damages ordered by
the State Commission were reduced by the National Commission to
Rs. 2.5 lacs.
4. Medical services should be rendered in accordance with the law
Poonam Verma v. Ashwin Patel
The factual background of the case
In this case, the respondent doctor, Ashwin Patel, was trained in homoeopathy for
four years and started his private practice. The appellant Poonam Verma,
approached the Supreme court for compensation for her deceased husband, who was
administered allopathic drugs for viral fever, and later typhoid fever by the
homoeopathy doctor. Her husband passed away within eight days of the treatment.
Questions before the court
Whether the appellant’s husband is a consumer, who can avail
damages for negligence in service?
Whether the conduct of the respondent doctor is negligent, and
there is a breach of duty of care?
Determining the amount of damages to the deceased’s wife
The reasoning of the court – Prescription of Allopathic drugs by a homoeopathy doctor
amounts to negligence
– Deceased was a consumer of medical services – The Court relied on the
reasoning in the classic case Indian Medical Association v. BP Shantha, and held that
the Consumer Protection Act is applicable to medical professionals, including
hospitals and private practitioners. Thus, the deceased was a “consumer” of the
medical services.
Determinants of negligent conduct by a doctor – The Court
relied on a case to hold that a doctor, when consulted by a patient,
owes him certain duties, namely, (a) a duty of care in deciding
whether to undertake the case; (b) a duty of care in deciding what
treatment to give; and (c) a duty of care in the administration of
that treatment. A breach of any of these duties gives a cause of
action for negligence to the patient.
The National Consumer Forum held that the doctor was negligent
in administering strong antibiotics to Pramod Verma initially for
the treatment of Viral Fever and subsequently for Typhoid Fever
without confirming the diagnosis by Blood Test or Urine
Examination.
Registration to practice bars Homeopathy practitioners
from Allopathy – The Court placed reliance on provisions of the
Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and Maharashtra Medical
Council Act, which state that a person cannot practice medicine in
any state unless he possesses requisite qualification and is enrolled
as a Medical Practitioner. The definition of medical practitioner
does not include Ayurveda, Unani, Homeopathy, or Biochemic
System of medicines.
Further, the certificate of registration issued to such homeopathy
practitioners states that it entitles them to practice in “Homeopathy
Only”. Thus, in accordance with established legal cases, rules of
medical negligence, evidence in the form of prescriptions, the court
reiterated the principle – Sic Utere tuo ut alienum non loedas– a
person is held liable at law for the consequences of his negligence
and held the doctor guilty of active negligence.
Compensation and Costs – The Court decided a compensation
of ₹ 3 lacs while considering the last drawn salary of the deceased
and the number of dependents. Legal costs in the case were also
reimbursed, and the Court directed the Medical Council of India to
initiate appropriate proceedings against the action of the
homeopathy doctor.
5. Educational institutions must refund any extra fee paid
Sehgal School of Competition v Dalbir Singh
The factual background of the case
In this landmark judgement concerning educational institutions that dates
back to the year 2005, a student was asked to deposit lump sum fees of
₹18,734 as fees for coaching for medical entrance examinations for the next
two years. This was deposited by the student in two complete instalments
within the first six months of classes. However, the student realised later
that the quality of the coaching institute was substandard, and therefore
sought a refund for the remaining period, which was refused by the
coaching institute.
Questions before the court
Can a student seek a refund of fees paid to a coaching class for the
remaining period of classes that are yet to be held?
In case of a refusal to refund fee, can a claim for mental agony for
pressing legal charges to be sought?
The reasoning of the Commission – Upholding student’s right to be refunded for remaining
classes
Clauses prohibiting refund of fees are unfair – The
Commission notes that educational institutes or coaching centre
that charge a lump sum fees for the whole duration or should
refund the fees if service is deficient in the quality of coaching etc.
Any clause saying that fees once paid shall not be refunded is
unconscionable and unfair and therefore not enforceable. This view
was maintained by District and State Forums as well as in appeal by
the National Commission.
Quashing respondent’s argument on the reservation of
seat – The respondent coaching centre argued before the
commission that the student had withdrawn voluntarily and,
therefore, there exists no deficiency of service. They submitted
records that showed good results of the institute and alleged that it
was wrong to observe that their coaching was not up to the mark.
To justify taking the entire fees of two years lump sump, it was
stated that the conditions imposed by the coaching required non-
transferability of the seat, and therefore no refund of the fee was
possible under any circumstance. The court dismissed this
argument and further quoted UGC guidelines that mention that
even if a student has not attended even a single class, an amount of
₹1000 may be deducted and proportionate charges for hostel fees,
etc, and the balance amount has to be refunded in its entirety. On
blocking of the seat, the Commission advised that a reserve list of
candidates may be maintained, and waitlisted candidates may be
given the opportunity to apply for the seat.
Additional compensation – In the order by State Consumer
Forum, it was mentioned that not just the balance amount of fee,
but also a higher compensation for legal costs as well as the pain
that the student had to undertake, could be availed in such cases.
