Max Super Speciality Hospital Wins in Consumer Court Over Radiation Therapy Complaint

Max Super-speciality Hospital Exonerated in Cancer Patient Case

Background of the Case

New Delhi: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, North-East Delhi, has recently cleared Max Super-speciality Hospital in Vaishali, Ghaziabad, of allegations regarding a deficiency of service in the treatment of a cancer patient who passed away shortly after initiating radiation therapy. The origins of the case date back to 2022, when the complainant’s husband sought treatment for cancer at the hospital.

Treatment Timeline

At the initial consultation, the treating doctor recommended chemotherapy and radiation therapy. The patient commenced chemotherapy and made a payment for the treatment. However, after further examination, the doctor informed the complainant’s husband that radiation therapy was not feasible at that moment and advised him to request a refund for the radiation therapy fee. Subsequently, the patient died at home.

Refund Request and Hospital Response

After the patient’s passing, the complainant, accompanied by her brother-in-law, approached the hospital’s cash counter to collect the refund. An official instructed them to submit a written application along with the original receipt. Despite multiple follow-ups, the hospital allegedly denied the refund, citing hospital policy.

Consequently, the complainant filed a consumer complaint seeking a refund of Rs 50,000 paid by her husband, with an interest rate of 18% per annum. Additionally, she requested Rs 50,000 for mental harassment and sought litigation costs.

Hospital’s Defense

In response, the hospital and the treating doctor contended that the complaint was made as an afterthought, arguing that there was no valid cause of action for the complainant. They stated that radiation therapy was initially planned and the estimated cost for the treatment was Rs 1,52,110. The patient was admitted, and necessary investigations were conducted before the treatment was discontinued. The hospital claimed that all expenses had been communicated to the complainant and that Rs 6,440 remained unutilized.

Consumer Court’s Findings

After reviewing the arguments from both parties, the consumer court highlighted that the complainant stated Rs 50,000 was paid for radiation therapy. However, the court noted that the hospital receipt did not specifically indicate that this amount was allocated for radiation services.

The court pointed out, “The bill issued by the hospital shows that it was deposited on 31.01.2022, and on 02.02.2022, the patient’s case was investigated and chemotherapy was administered. This implies that the expenses incurred during the patient’s admission on 02.02.2022 were deducted from the Rs 50,000 deposited on 31.01.2022.”

Moreover, it was clarified that the complainant did not provide evidence of an additional Rs 50,000 payment. The hospital detailed its expenses, affirming that Rs 6,440 remained unutilized.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the commission concluded that there was no deficiency of service by the hospital and dismissed the complaint. The court stated, “In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Hence, the complaint is dismissed. The Complainants may claim the said amount from the hospital as per procedure.”

For further details, you can view the order [here](https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/max-no-med-negligence-318718.pdf).

Related Cases

Also Read: No deficiency in not shifting critical patient to higher center: NCDRC absolves orthopaedic surgeon, general surgeon, anaesthetist, hospital.