Consumer Court junks complaint against Max super speciality hospital Ghaziabad in radiation therapy dispute

However, after checking the patient, the treating doctor said that radiation therapy was not possible at that time and told him to take his refund for radiation therapy. After this, the patient expired at home. Following this, when the complainant, along with her brother-in-law, visited the cash counter of radiation therapy for taking the refund, then an official of the hospital asked to write an application and submit it along with the original receipt of the cash. Allegedly, despite several visits afterwards, the hospital refused to refund the amount citing hospital policy.

Therefore, filing the consumer complaint, the complainant prayed for a refund of Rs 50,000 paid by the complainant's husband along with interest @18% p.a. Apart from this, the complainant also prayed for Rs 50,000 towards mental harassment and also prayed for litigation cost.

On the other hand, the treating doctor and hospital argued that the complaint was filed as an afterthought and alleged that there was no cause of action in favour of the Complainant. 

It was further submitted that the patient was planned for radiation therapy and estimated cost for the treatment was Rs 1,52,110. The patient was admitted in the hospital and subsequently, the patient's investigation (CT Scan) and planning for radiation were done successfully, and he deposited an amount of Rs 50,000 in cash. However, thereafter, the patient discontinued the treatment in between. It was also submitted that the estimations and calculations of the expenses of the treatment in the hospital had been shared with the complainant. In fact, the patient and his family were also informed that Rs 6,440 was payable to the parties by the hospital. 

Further providing the estimated cost of treatment and the expenses for treatment partially done, the hospital claimed that the allegations made in the complaint were false and therefore, the hospital prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

After hearing the submissions by the counsels by the complainant and the hospital, the consumer court noted that the Complainants argued that Rs 50,000 was deposited for radiation therapy. However, the Commission noted that the receipt issued by the hospital did not show that the said amount was deposited for radiation therapy.

"The bill issued by the hospital shows that it was deposited on 31.01.2022 and thereafter, on 02.02.2022 the case of the patient was investigated and discussed and on that day fist chemotherapy was also given. Meaning thereby, the expenses during the admission of the patient on 02.02.2022 was adjusted from the amount of Rs. 50,000/- deposited on 31.01.2022. It is not the case of the Complainants that apart from the said amount of Rs. 50,000/- they have also deposited some additional Rs. 50,000/-. The hospital has given the details of the expenses and after deducting the expenses amount of Rs. 6,440/- is still unutilized and is lying with the hospital," the Consumer Court noted at this outset.

Accordingly, it held that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the treating hospital and dismissed the complaint. It observed, "In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Hence, the complaint is dismissed. The Complainants may claim the said amount from the hospital as per procedure."

To view the order, click on the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/max-no-med-negligence-318718.pdf

Also Read: No deficiency in not Shifting Critical Patient to Higher Center: NCDRC absolves Orthopaedic Surgeon, General Surgeon, Anaesthetist, hospital