New Delhi District Commission Holds Santushti Eye Centre Liable For Prescribing Farsighted Lenses Instead Of Nearsighted Lens

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – X, New Delhi bench of Monika Aggarwal Srivastava (President), Dr Rajender Dhar (Member) and Ritu Garodi (Member) held Santushti Eye Centre liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices due to the incorrect prescription of eyeglasses and eye drops, which worsened the Complainant's existing eye issues. Brief Facts: The Complainant visited Santushti Eye Centre, Khanpur, New Delhi (“Clinic”) due to problems with watery eyes and other eyesight issues. The Clinic provided treatment and issued a prescription, advising the Complainant to use eyeglasses. The Complainant purchased eyeglasses from the Clinic for Rs. 1,500/-, which included consultation and the cost of the glasses. The Complainant contended that despite using the prescribed eye drops, there was no improvement in his vision, and he experienced headaches. Upon complaint, the Clinic repeatedly advised continuing with the eye drops and claimed that it would lead to improvement. Dissatisfied, the Complainant visited Sachdeva Vision Care where it was indicated that the eye check-up performed by the Clinic was inadequate. Upon consulting another doctor and undergoing tests, the Complainant discovered that the eyeglasses prescribed by the Clinic were incorrect. The Complainant needed plus lenses (farsightedness) for better vision, contrary to the minus lenses (nearsightedness) prescribed. This error allegedly caused the Complainant to be bedridden for two to three days due to the Clinic's negligence. On 11th February 2022, the Complainant revisited the clinic to complain about the negligence and was charged Rs. 500/- for consultation. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – X, Delhi (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against the Clinic. Observations by the District Commission: The District Commission held that the Clinic failed to conduct the Complainant's eye test in a proper and diligent manner. It noted that the eye test was conducted by an untrained individual who was not certified as an ophthalmologist. This lapse resulted in the incorrect prescription of eyeglasses and eye drops for the complainant which led to severe headaches and persistent watery eyes. The District Commission held that the erroneous diagnosis and subsequent improper treatment amounted to a deficiency in services and constituted unfair trade practices on the part of the Clinic. Therefore, the District Commission directed the Clinic to pay a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the Complainant, along with interest at the rate of 8%. It also directed the Clinic to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the Complainant as compensation for the mental harassment and agony. It was also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards the litigation expenses. Case Title: Ikrar Hussain vs Santushti Eye Centre Case Number: CC/347/2022

New Delhi District Commission Holds Santushti Eye Centre Liable For Prescribing Farsighted Lenses Instead Of Nearsighted Lens

Smita Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Smita Singh

New Delhi District Commission Holds Santushti Eye Centre Liable For Prescribing Farsighted Lenses Instead Of Nearsighted Lens

Smita Singh

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Smita Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers