Abstract

A case was disposed by NCDRC related to unfair trade practices by publishing a misleading advertisement. Misleading advertisement by a Hospital was not clear about following:

• Whether it is applicable for routine patients or the emergency patients?
• Whether benefit is only for the cash payment customers?

NCDRC opined that in our view, as per the record, ‘Yukon Elite’ stent, which the OP had implanted, was also a medicated stent.  If we go by the plain words of the advertisement, any common / prudent person will be misled by such advertisement. As per the advertisement, it is clear that medicated stent will be used during the angioplasty. In our view, the OP had intentionally concealed the material information in the advertisement to avail the benefits of scheme.  It is quite surprising that the Scheme was applicable for the routine or planned patients undergoing angiography / angioplasty.

No one will approach the hospital as a routine investigation for angiography and opt for the procedure of angioplasty. But, commonly most of the cases approach the hospital in emergency cardiac problems and after investigations the decision of angioplasty ought to be taken. As contended by OP, the scheme was not applicable for emergency patients, is baseless and has no ground. [Para 9]

NCDRC concluded that the germane question was that the hospital attracted the complainant with its advertisement, and, after the complainant was totally in its and its treating doctors’ hands with a cardiac problem in emergency conditions, imposed its conditions and additional costs highhandedly and arbitrarily at its end, and obtained so-called ‘consent’ from the complainant’s wife in emergency conditions in forced duress. [Para 13(v)]

All applicable salient terms and conditions, and including those relating to ‘quality’ of the medicated stent and ‘excluded categories’, were required to and should have been stated ab initio upfront in the advertisement, which was not done by the hospital. [Para 13(vi)]

The acts and conduct of the hospital were unfair and deceptive, an unfair trade practice within the meaning of Section 2(1)(r) of the Act 1986. [Para 13(vii)]