Consumer Forum asks dental institute to pay Rs 25,000 as compensation for extracting the wrong tooth

Consumer forum asked Dr Harvansh Singh Judge Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, PU, to give Rs 10,000 as cost of litigation to complainant

By: Express News Service | Chandigarh | Published:January 4, 2017 4:53 am

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum directed a dental institute affiliated with the Panjab University to give Rs 25,000 as compensation to a resident of Manimajra for extracting the wrong tooth.

Pronouncing the orders on January 2, the consumer forum asked Dr Harvansh Singh Judge Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Panjab University, to give Rs 10,000 as cost of litigation to complainant Tanvir Malik.

Watch what else is in the news

Malik stated in the complaint that on September 6, 2015, the complainant went to the institute for treatment of his braces, where he was advised to get his wisdom tooth extracted. On September 10, 2015, tooth extraction surgery for Tooth No 28 and 38 was done by one of the doctors of the institute. He alleged that though the tooth was extracted properly, however, instead of tooth no 28, tooth no 27 was extracted due to the negligence of the doctor. The complainant also confirmed the said fact from Dr Batth’s Dental Health Care Implant & Cosmetic Centre, Panchkula.

He then sent a legal notice to the dental institute on September 15, 2015, who initially assured to compensate him, but subsequently did nothing.

The consumer forum sent summons to the dental institute who said the doctor treated the complainant to the best of his capability, as he was an experienced doctor of the institute and till the time of his death, there was no complaint against him. The institute further added that had the said doctor been alive, he would have defended himself, with regard to his professional and personal conduct in the instant case.

Pronouncing the orders, the forum held, “The institute is found deficient in giving proper service to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint of the complainant deserves to succeed against the institute and the same is allowed.”