News By/Courtesy: Neha Mishra | 11 Dec 2021 15:18pm IST


  • The appellant had complaint against services of the hospital in the SC
  • The SC held that she was not a consumer as per Consumer Protection Act.
  • It was decided after the contention that the hospital had not taken any consideration for the said services.

The Supreme Court as of late held that administrations delivered by clinical officials for no considerations, in the interest of the emergency clinic, would not fall inside the ambit of 'service' under Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA).

A Division Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian was hearing an appeal against a request for the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) which held that the petitioner was not a 'consumer' inside the significance of Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the CPA. "As far as Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Act, a consumer is the person who recruits or benefits of any administrations for a 'thought' which has been paid or guaranteed or incompletely paid or somewhat guaranteed," the Bench noted.

It was the conceded instance of the litigant that she had not paid any thought for benefiting the administrations of the specialists and the medical attendants. Accordingly, it was held that she would not be covered under the meaning of 'buyer' to get benefits under the CPA. The petitioner contended that payment for services rendered is certifiably not an essential component to file a grievance under the CPA. Notwithstanding, the Court declined to acknowledge the said contention considering its choice in Indian Medical Association v. VP Shantha and Ors, where the Court had held that assuming the help delivered by the clinic doesn't fall inside the ambit of 2(1)(0) of the Act being for nothing, similar assistance can't be treated as an administration under Section 2(1)(0).

This is because the help has been delivered by a clinical official who gets compensation for the work in the emergency clinic. "It was in this manner finished up (in Indian Medical Association) that the administrations delivered by worker clinical official to such an individual would hence keep on being administration delivered for nothing and would be outside the domain of Section 2(1)(0) of the Act." Thus, the appeal was excused. Advocate-on-Record Niranjana Singh and Advocate Atul Tripathi showed up for the petitioner.

Section Editor: Kadam Hans | 11 Dec 2021 22:24pm IST

Tags : #hospital #medical #SC #NCDRC #CPA #consumer #services #appeal #dismissed #consideration

Latest News

Copyright Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.