Sign in

Ludhiana: Hospital penalised ₹85k for ‘inflated’ medical bill

The facility charged 35,000 for covid equipment, told to refund it along with 50,000 as compensation to complainant

Updated on: Jan 9, 2025, 07:36:14 IST
By , Ludhiana
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana, has imposed 85,000 as penalty on Jain Multispeciality Hospital in Khanna for “overcharging” and providing “inadequate” treatment to a patient.

Jain Multispecialty Hospital has denied any wrongdoing, stating that the complainant received appropriate care during his stay at the facility. (HT File)
Jain Multispecialty Hospital has denied any wrongdoing, stating that the complainant received appropriate care during his stay at the facility. (HT File)

Complainant Surjit Singh, 61, a resident of Mandi Gobindgarh, had stated that he was admitted to Jain Multispecialty Hospital on September 1, 2020, for treatment of uncontrolled blood sugar, pneumonitis and sepsis. He noted that despite undergoing treatment for 14 days, his condition worsened, prompting his transfer to another hospital in Zirakpur, where he was treated from September 14 to 17, 2020.

Singh complained that Jain Multispecialty Hospital charged him an “inflated” amount of 3,12,450 for treatment. He also pointed out an additional charge of 35,000, listed as extra charges, which he argued was unreasonable.

He contended that the treatment at Jain Multispecialty Hospital was inadequate, which forced him to spend 1,64,401 more at another hospital. This prompted him to seek a refund of the hospital charges, as well as compensation for the physical pain and mental agony he endured.

In its defence, the hospital denied any wrongdoing, stating that Singh received appropriate care during his stay. The hospital further explained that the 35,000 charge covered Covid-19-related safety equipment and additional services, deemed necessary at the time due to the pandemic.

After reviewing the case, the commission, led by Sanjeev Batra and member Monika Bhagat, concluded that 35,000 extra charge was unjustified. There was no evidence to suggest that Singh required Covid-specific treatment or tests. Additionally, despite high charges for room, medicine and professional services, the commission found that the extra charges lacked transparency and could not be justified by the hospital.

As a result, the commission invoked Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, ordering Jain Multispecialty Hospital to refund 35,000 extra charges to Singh, along with 8% annual interest from the date of payment. The hospital was also directed to pay 50,000 in compensation for the inconvenience caused. The hospital has been given 30 days to comply with the order.