BEFORE THE HON'BLE COMISSION OF DISTRICT
coNsuMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSTOT{, QUTUB
INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEW DELHI
CC. No. of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ms. Kanika Sharma
Rlo JG-24, First Floor, Khirki Extension,
Malviya Nagar, New Delhi - 110017. ...Cotrqtlaltn;ant
VERSUS
3) M/s Gorgeous Looks
Through its Proprietor/Managing Partner
E-261, Ground Floor, Greater Kailash - II,
New Delhi - 110048.
Also at: 3/17, East Patel Nagar, Metro Station,
New Delhi - 110018.
Email : drsharmacharu@5rahoo. com
4/ Dr. Charu Sharma
MBBS, MS (General Surgery), M.Ch. (plastic Surgery)
Practising at M/s Gorgeous Looks ...Oopostte pattles
I. That the complainant is peace loving
and law _ abiding
citizen of India and having
a clean antecedent and residing
at the above_mentioned
.Lr\-,r.rr^r auqress
address a.tong
alor with his family
members.
o
2, That the present Complaint is being preferred under
Consumer Protection Act, 2019, for redressal of grievances
arising out of grave medical negligence, professional
misconduct, misrepresentation, deficiency in service, and
unfair trade practices committed by the Opposite Parties,
resulting in immense physical, emotional, and financial
hardship to the Complainant.
3. That tJle Complainant is a *consumer" within the meaning
of the Consumer Protection Act, 2O19, having availed of
medical services from the Opposite Parties upon paJrment
of lawful consideration. The Opposite Parties fall within the
definition of n*tttice prouiders" of the said Act.
FACTUAL MATRf,K
4.That in April 2024, tJle Complainant approached the
Opposite Party No. 2 at h.er clinic otrll/s Grcltgeous Loolcs"
for a consultation regarding rhinoplasty. The Opposite
Party No. 2, after examination and consultation,
recommended a surgical procedure involving the
application of an external plaster technique, assuring the
Complainant of aesthetically superior results and minimal
associated risks.
5. That relying upon the professional assurance and
representations made by the Opposite Party No. 2, the
Complainant, acting in good faith, consented to the said
procedure and made a pa5rment of Rs. 1,20,O00/- (Rupees
One Lakh T\renty Thousaad only), part of which was paid
online and part in cash. True Copy of Payment Receipts are
annexed herewith and marked as Annenrre C-1.
6. That on 01.06.2024, Opposite Party No. 2, performed tJre
said surgery. However, contrar5r to the representations
made, tl:e external plaster technique was not applied post-
operatively. Consequenfly, Complainant experienced
immediate complications, including pain, infection,
swelling, and deformation of the nasal structure.
7. That the Complainant was compelled to attend multiple
follow-up consultations, during which Opposite Party No. 2
charged an additional sum of Rs. 2,500/- for post-operative
injection, despite prior assurances that such treatments
were included within the surgical package cost.
8. That, despite undergoing repeated treatments as prescribed
by Opposite Party No. 2, the Complainant's condition
deteriorated, resulting in adverse effects on her liver
attributable to the medications administered.
9. That during subsequent consultations, Opposite Party No.
2 deflected responsibility for the complications onto the
Complainant and, when confronted by the Complainant's
family, adopted an evasive and hostile demeanor.
1O. That Opposite Party No. 2 further demanded an additional
sum of Rs. 80,000/- to perform corrective surgical
procedures and, when questioned regarding the
Complainant's worsening condition, threaten the
Complainantto ndo uhateuer slte uc;nts."
11. That as a consequence of the negligence and
unprofessional conduct of the Opposite Parties, the
Complainant has suffered irreparable psychological
trauma, social embarrassment, breakdown of matrimonial
prospects, and has been compelled to seek professional
counselling.
12. That the Opposite Parties, despite being qualified medical
professionals, failed to adhere to the accepted standards of
medical care, thereby breaching the duty of care owed to
the Complainant. Furthermore, the Opposite Parties
engaged in unfair trade practices by misrepresenting tJ.e
nature of the procedure and extracting additional pa5rments
for wrongful gain ton themselves and causing the
Complainant wrongful linancial loss, physical harm, and
emotional distress. Accordingly, the Opposite Parties are
liable to refund all pa5rments made by the Complainant and
to compensate her for the damages suffered.
13. That the complainant sent a legal notice dated
Ot- f oF /z-oz-r through his counsel to the opposite
parties calling upon to pay the claim amount within tJ:e
period stipulated in the notice.
14. That the Complainant has not received arry redressal or
response from the Opposite Parties. She has been
compelled to run from pillar to post to secure a resolution
to her legitimate claims. This inaction has caused her
immense mental agony, emotional distress, Iinancial
hardship, and public humiliation. The Opposite Parties'
negligence and failure to address the grievances have
compounded her suffering. Accordingly, the Opposite
Parties are liable to compensate the Complainant with a
sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) for mental
pain, harassment, and loss caused due to their willful
neglect and def,rciency in service.
15. That the Complainant further claims an amount of Rs.
1,22,5OO/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty-Two Thousand Five
Hundred only), being the cost incurred towards the failed
and defective surgical procedure, along with applicable
interest from the date of pa5rment till realization. All the
relevant documents pertaining to tl:is case are annexed
hereto as per Index of this case for the kind perusal by this
Hon'lcle Commission.
16. That the acts and conduct of Opposite Parties No. 1 and 2,
being medical service providers, clearly reveal a gross
deficiency in service, professional misconduct, and breach
of duty of care. Their failure to adhere to the promised
treatment protocol and subsequent demand for unjustified
additional charges constitute unfair trade practices.
Therefore, the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally
liable to compensate tl.e Complainant for the pain,
suffering, financial loss, and mental trauma caused to her
due to their negligent and unethical conduct.
17. That tJ:e complaint is filed within the limitation period.
18. That the complainant permanenfly resides on the above-
mentioned address, thus it falls within the jurisdiction of
this Honble Court.
19. That tJ is Hon'ble Court has the territorial and pecuniar5z
jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.
,@
PRATR
a. Direct the Opposite Parties jointly and severally to refund
the entire sum of Rs. 1,22,500/- (Rupees One Lal<h Twenty-
T\vo Thousand Five Hundred only), along with interest @
l2o/o per annum from the date of pa5rment till realization;
b. Award compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs
only) for mental agony, pain, trauma, reputational damage,
and future corrective medical treatment;
c. Award litigation and legal costs of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only);
d. Pass such other and further orders as may be deemed just,
equitable and in the interest ofjustice.
Dated: 2l lOSl2O25
Place: New Delhi
Through Counsel
.kw*,,
revrnh$k o*rNERsr
AI'VOCATBS
Chamber No. 544, Lawyers Block, Saket Court, New Delhi - 17
E : prashantra wato2@mall- colrn I M: +9 7 -99 5 84 5 Og I 5
VERIFICATION
I, the Complainant above named, do hereby declare and veriff
that the facts stated in this Complaint are true and correct to my
personal knowledge and belief, and no material facts have been
concealed therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this _ day of * ,2025.
"W
BEFORT THE HON'BLE COMISSION OF DISTRICT
coNsuMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMTSSTON, QUTUB
INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEtrI DELHI
CC. No. of 2025
IT{ THE MATTER OF:
-
Ms. Kanika Sharma ...ComPlalnant
VERSUS
M/s Gorgeous Looks & Anr. ...Opposlte Prrrties
AFT'IDAVIT
r, Ms. Kanika Sharma, Aged about 29 years, D/o Fcrer tdth?f
JG-24, First Floor, I(hirki Extension, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi -
11O017, do hereby solemnly aflirm and declare as under:
1. That I am the Complainant in the above-mentioned case
- 9. No.31/?i"a fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of
Reroxrn grdtd I am competent to swear this aJlidavit.
a accompanying complaint under section 35 of
1
er Act, 2019 has been drafted by my counsel on
fry instructions and same has been read and explained to
me in my vernacular language.
3. That the contents of the said complaint are true ald correct
and are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity,
d may be read as part and parcel of this aJfidavit.
---*,,,,*^aa. )l-#
,.."-,r*-Mwffihl,'iJ'*"andcorrectstatement'
l;;XH}l?:Yi,,X#ffiax
verified at New Derhi on Jlj[#qf
ffi6ffi
June, 202s, that the
::1..,11"_ "1-T: :o:":-
,rfid"t are true and correct to my
"p"5
knowledge and belief. No part of it is false and nothing mate.ial
has been concealed tl
'WTffi:**:M*W
,YJ. ;;;; ;;; A.E
8:Wi;'1- /olrrioxanT
;;; ;;.t;:
, ;'f:*'*i ;';
:*:
lip;:, :,;:lliiTlil _i: rd_il
lli:i""""1,1!l!,linillr,;**l
xi";iioi,f[)_
oueand correcr,o i.i;
0 i JUN ZAii
Neu/ Ile
