HARI SHANKER RATHORE Vs. ESI HOSPITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By a highly laconic order dated 1.9.1999 the District Forum dismissed the complaint of the appellant seeking compensation by referring to a decision of the National Commission in 1999 CPJ NCARC (page 18). Feeling aggrieved, appellant has preferred this appeal.

(2.) The appellant was an employee of the respondent and from his salary deductions were being made towards medical facilities to be availed by him. His wife was admitted in the respondent hospital for D&C operation on 24.9.1998. The said operation was allegedly performed negligently due to which the uterus of the wife of the appellant got punctured by the tools used by the doctors during the operation and consequently by subsequent operation the uterus was removed.

(3.) Whenever any consideration is received by an employer towards medical facilities to be provided to the employee it comes within the definition of consideration received for providing service as defined under Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act. Any allegation of medical negligence comes within the deficiency as defined by Section 2(1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 . Consideration received by employer from its employee by making him a member of a particular hospital is consideration received by the hospital. Such an arrangement is essentially a tripartite arrangement between the employer, employee and the hospital.