Dismissed

Xen Efficiency Division and Ors. v. Manish Malik

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2018RSA/2936/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a regular second appeal against a lower court decree holding liable to reimburse medical bills, this court dismissed the appeal. The lower court had granted relief without awarding interest and rejected reimbursement claims based on the respondent not seeking treatment from an empanelled hospital at the time. This court held that technicalities should not bar immediate medical aid claims.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed without any further relief being granted.

Xen Efficiency Division and Ors. Vs Manish Malik — Medical Negligence | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH

¶2

Regul ar Second Appeal No. 2936 of 2016 ( O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 24. 05. 2018

¶3

XEN, Ef f i ci ency Di vi si on, HPGCL, Pani pat and ot her s

…. . Appel l ant s

ver sus

Mani sh Mal i k

CORAM: - HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE AMI T RAWAL

¶8

Pr esent : Mr . Adi t ya Jai n, Advocat e f or t he appel l ant s

¶9

AMI T RAWAL, J. ( Or al ) :

¶10

The appel l ant s- def endant s ar e i n r egul ar second appeal agai nst t he concur r ent f i ndi ng of f act wher eby t he sui t at t he i nst ance of t he r espondent - pl ai nt i f f cl ai mi ng decl ar at i on of r ei mbur sement of medi cal bi l l s of Rs. 1, 25, 633/ - has been decr eed but wi t hout i nt er est .

¶11

Mr . Adi t ya Jai n, l ear ned counsel appear i ng on behal f of t he appel l ant s- def endant s, submi t t ed t hat t he depar t ment had r ej ect ed t he r ei mbur sement of t he medi cal bi l l s on t he pr emi se t hat t he r espondent - pl ai nt i f f had not under t aken t he medi cal t r eat ment of hi s 10 year s ol d son f r om a hospi t al on t he penal of t he depar t ment . I n f act , t he chi l d was t r eat ed at Jai pur Gol den Hospi t al at Pani pat , t hough t he sai d hospi t al was enl i st ed on t he panel of hospi t al s of Gover nment of Har yana/ HPGCL/ HPU post t he t r eat ment i . e. on 03. 06. 2011. The Cour t s bel ow, t her ef or e, have not cor r ect l y i nt er pr et ed t he ci r cul ar and er r oneousl y decr eed t he

¶12

Parkash Chand 2018.05.25 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶13

RSA- 2936- 2016

¶14

- 2 -

¶15

sui t . The appel l ant s- def endant s have appr oached t hi s cour t f or set t i ng asi de t he f i ndi ngs under chal l enge.

¶16

I have hear d l ear ned counsel f or t he appel l ant s and am of t he vi ew t hat t her e i s no f or ce and mer i t i n t he submi ssi ons made on behal f of t he appel l ant s- def endant s, f or , i t has been consi st ent l y hel d by var i ous cour t s and al so i n t he j udgment s not i ced i n t he i mpugned j udgment and decr ee t hat a per son cannot be pr event ed f r om pr ovi di ng i mmedi at e medi cal ai d and t r eat ment t o hi s war ds/ f ami l y member s f r om t he hospi t al whi ch i s not on t he panel of t he depar t ment i n t he event of medi cal exi gency. I t i s a mat t er of r ecor d t hat post t he t r eat ment t he af or ement i oned hospi t al had been empanel l ed vi de Ex. D1 dat ed 03. 06. 2011. I am of t he vi ew t hat such t echni cal i t i es shoul d not be al l owed t o come i n t he way of t he af f ect ed par t y who cannot be made t o wai t f or i ndef i ni t e per i od on account of non- avai l abi l i t y of t he doct or s i n t he empanel l ed hospi t al s.

¶17

The concur r ent f i ndi ng of f act and l aw does not war r ant i nt er f er ence i n t he r egul ar second appeal . No quest i on of l aw much l ess a subst ant i al quest i on of l aw i s i nvol ved.

¶18

Di smi ssed.

¶19

1. 2018 par kash

¶20

( AMI T RAWAL) JUDGE

¶21

NOTE: Whet her speaki ng/ non- speaki ng: Speaki ng Whet her r epor t abl e: YES/ NO

¶22

Parkash Chand 2018.05.25 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

RSA- 2936- 2016

¶24

- 3 -

¶25

Parkash Chand 2018.05.25 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Xen Efficiency Division and Ors. v. Manish Malik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xen Efficiency Division and Ors. v. Manish Malik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paramjit Singh through Lrs Amir Kaur and Ors. Vs Karamjit Singh & Anr.

Bijender Vs Sat Narain and Ors.

Giasi Vs Utti Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Anr.

Ritu Garg Vs United India Insurance and Others

Prabhati Devi Vs Mandir Shri Ram Chander Ji Near Puran Thana, Bhatinda etc.

Chanan Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.