M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The 3rd opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) The complainant/ 1st respondent, in this appeal, had taken a mediclaim policy, with the 1st opposite party, and on that basis, a cashless credit card facility was issued by the 2nd opposite party, for taking treatment in the empanelled hospital including the 3rd hospital also. On 20.3.2004, the complainant had severe chest pain, uneasiness, and therefore rushed to the 3rd opposite party hospital at 4.30 p.m, where the duty doctor directed the complainant to go to ICU , where medical checkup was done, informing the elevated BP, not a good sign. Before proceeding to the hospital, the complainant also informed the 2nd opposite party, for authorization.
(3.) The 3rd opposite party, despite request of the complainant for admission, refused to admit him in the hospital, insisting payment of Rs.20000/-, and complainant was unable to pay the said amount reasonably, he was compulsorily forced to discharge from the hospital at 10 p.m. The matter was reported to the authorities concerned, no action has been taken Though the 3rd opposite party had collected a sum of Rs.980/-, treating the complainant, as out patient, the denial of the 3rd opposite party, to admit and give treatment as inpatient, should be construed as negligence and deficiency of service, which had caused mental agony, for which the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1 lakh, as compensation. Thus claiming a consumer complaint was filed.;