Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed by the complainant against the order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which had quantified compensation at Rs. 5,00,000, directing part of it to be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid account. The appellant's son, Prashant, suffered from febrile convulsions, and the appellant sought treatment from respondent No.1, who claimed to provide a cure through Ayurvedic medicine. Despite treatment, Prashant's condition worsened, leading the appellant to consult other medical professionals. The appellant alleged that respondent No.1 prescribed Allopathic medicines without proper authority and was guilty of medical negligence. The National Commission found respondent No.1 guilty of unfair trade practice but upheld his right to prescribe Allopathic medicines based on a letter from the U.P. Government. The Supreme Court, however, found that the letter did not apply retroactively and that respondent No.1 had not proven his registration with the Medical Council. The court held that both the appellant and her son suffered injuries due to the misleading advertisement and negligence, leading to an enhancement of compensation to Rs. 15 lakhs, which the respondents were directed to pay within three months. The appeal was allowed without any order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Consumer Protection - Unfair Trade Practice - False Representation - Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 14(1)(f) - Respondent No.1 was found guilty of making false representations regarding treatment efficacy, leading to physical and mental injury to the appellant and her son. The National Commission's order was set aside, and compensation was enhanced to Rs.15 lakhs. Held that misleading advertisements and negligence warranted increased compensation (Paras 15-16).
Issue of Consideration
Whether respondent No.1 was entitled to practice and prescribe modern Allopathic medicines; what is the amount of compensation to which the appellant is entitled?
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the National Commission's order regarding the deposit of part of the compensation and enhanced the total compensation to Rs. 15 lakhs, directing the respondents to pay the amount to the appellant within three months.
Law Points
- Consumer protection
- unfair trade practice
- medical negligence
- compensation quantification
