LI Network
Published on: December 18, 2023 at 01:30 IST
In a recent ruling by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh, consisting of Pawanjit Singh (President), Surjeet Kaur (Member), and Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member), a cosmetic surgeon in Chandigarh has been held responsible for performing an unsuccessful chest enhancement surgery, resulting in the development of lymph on the patient’s chest.
The Commission determined a significant service deficiency on the part of the doctor, as the surgery failed to yield the expected results for which the complainant had invested a substantial amount of money.
Key Points:
The complainant underwent an Ultra Sonic Liposuction treatment for the chin, chest, and abdomen at Dr. Deepak Kalia’s clinic in Chandigarh. Despite the procedure, there was no change in chest measurements post-surgery, and the complainant noticed the development of lymph on his body.
The clinic did not provide any visual evidence, such as photographs or samples, for the patient’s satisfaction. Moreover, despite visible differences in chest measurements on the right and left sides, the overall outcome did not meet the complainant’s expectations.
Requests for a complete medical file, including bed head tickets, follow-up details, and discharge summaries, were unmet by the doctor. This led the complainant to file a consumer complaint with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh.
In response, the doctor acknowledged the factual scenario but argued that the complainant did not attend follow-up sessions after discharge and denied any document request. The doctor asserted that all actions were carried out diligently and with due care.
Observations by the Commission:
The Commission highlighted that the complainant did not experience any positive outcome from the surgery despite the substantial financial investment. Additionally, the lack of evidence, such as measurements before and after the surgery, raised doubts about the procedure’s effectiveness.
Consequently, the District Commission concluded that there was a clear service deficiency on the doctor’s part, and the surgery did not meet the desired results for which the complainant had expended a significant amount.
Commission’s Decision:
The District Commission directed the clinic to partially refund the surgery cost, totaling Rs. 46,000/-, along with 9% per annum interest from the deposit date until payment. The doctor was also instructed to compensate the complainant with Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 7,500/- for litigation costs.
Case Title: X vs Dr. Deepak Kalia and Anr. (Patient name redacted)
