ARJUN vs PATIDAR SAMAJ CHHATRAWAS SAMITI

THE complainant dissatisfied with the award has filed this appeal against the order dated 10.9.2001 passed in Case No. 27/2000 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dhar (for short the ''District Forum'').

ADMITTEDLY, the appellant was a student in upper K.G. in the academic year 1998-99 who was staying in the hostel. On 14.4.1999 the appellant received injury in his right eye. The respondent did not take care resulted in loss of his vision. The complaint filed was resisted. The District Forum after appreciation of the evidence found deficiency in service in not taking the complainant for treatment, resulting in loss of vision, hence ordered to pay compensation for permanent disability, mental pain and sufferings of Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 500/- as costs of the proceedings within a period of one month, and in failure amount to carry interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from 14.4.1999. Admittedly, the respondent has not preferred any appeal and made payment to the appellant as ordered by the District Forum.

After hearing learned Counsels for the parties and on reappraisal of evidence on record, the finding of the District Forum that the respondent on receiving of injury in the eye was not provided immediate medical aid by not taking the appellant to an expert which resulted in loss of vision does not call for interference.

FROM the record, we find that on 15.4.1999 the appellant boy was taken to Dr. C.S. Gangrade who on examination found Traumatic Cataract and advised surgery and prescribed some medicines. The appellant''s father has taken the appellant to Indore to consult experts, however, the appellant did not go for surgery. The District Forum got the appellant medically examined by the Medical Board. The Medical Board vide report No. Med./Board/2000/494 dated 10.5.2001 found that the appellant had Corneal Sear RT eye (Old) and having opted for Traumatic Cataract (RE) with divergent squint with Ambyopia (RE). A disability certificate was also given. The record also reveals that the appellant''s father did not opt for surgery after consultation with the experts at Indore. In such circumstances, the appellant is also to be blamed as if proper treatment and surgery would have been performed the appellant would not have lost vision or the effect of squint would have also been removed.

IN such circumstances, though the respondent is deficient in service in not taking the appellant to the Doctor immediately at the time of receiving injury for treatment and he had taken the appellant to Dr. C.S. Gangrade on 15.4.1999 i.e., on the next day who advised for surgery and his father was also informed late which resulted damage to his eye. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the compensation awarded for permanent disability, mental pain and sufferings of Rs. 20,000/- be enhanced to Rs. 1,00,000/- as appellant''s father was informed late and thereafter he had taken the appellant to INdore, where he was treated. In the circumstances, the ends of justice would meet if compensation of Rs. 20,000/- is enhanced to Rs. 35,000/- which will meet the expenses for surgery as surgery required an amount of Rs. 15,700/-, therefore, the appellant''s father could not pay. Accordingly, we direct the respondent to pay compensation of Rs. 35,000/- along with Rs. 1,000/- as costs of the proceedings throughout which shall be paid by the respondents to the appellant within a period of one month from today. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order of the District Forum shall stand modified as indicated hereinabove. A copy of this order be conveyed to the parties and a copy be sent to the District Forum along with the record of the case. Appeal allowed.