Case Stats
- Citation: AIR 1996 SC 550 : (1995) 6 SCC 651
- Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.C. Agrawal, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.L. Hansaria
- Date of Decision: 13 November 1995
- Final Decision: Disposed Of
[Judgment Source]
https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=296983
Law Points Raised
1. Whether medical services fall under the definition of "service" as per Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
2. Whether patients are considered "consumers" under Section 2(1)(d) of the Act.
3. Applicability of the Act to Government hospitals and charitable institutions.
4. Whether legal heirs of deceased patients can seek remedy under the Consumer Protection Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that medical services provided for consideration (including in private hospitals or by private practitioners) come within the definition of "service" under Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act. Hence, patients availing such services are considered "consumers". However, free services provided in Government hospitals are not covered, unless part of the services are charged.
Final Ruling
- The Court ruled that:
- Medical practitioners and hospitals rendering services for consideration fall under the Consumer Protection Act.
- Patients availing paid services are consumers.
- Legal heirs of deceased patients can file complaints.
- Services rendered entirely free (like in government hospitals) do not constitute “service” under the Act.
Key Paragraph References
- Paragraph 2–4: Conflict in interpretation by various High Courts and National Commission.
- Paragraph 5: Applicability to Government hospitals and schemes.
- Paragraph 6: Definition of service and consumer – clarified by National Commission and affirmed.
Summary
This judgment is a turning point in Indian consumer law, expanding the scope of the Consumer Protection Act to include the medical profession. The Supreme Court struck a balance between accountability and service ethics, confirming that medical negligence and deficiency of service are justiciable under the Act when services are rendered for payment. This promotes transparency, empowers patients, and ensures redress for medical grievances.