Court case(2007) 4 SCC 579

The appellant, Kishore Lal, was an insured person under the Employees' State Insurance Act 1948, under which contributions are paid by employers and employees and medical benefit is provided to insured persons through the Corporation's hospitals and dispensaries. He complained to the consumer forum of negligence and deficiency in the medical services provided to him under the scheme. The question that reached the Supreme Court was whether such a complaint lies under the Consumer Protection Act at all: the Corporation contended that the services were statutory and free to the beneficiary, and that disputes under the ESI Act had to be decided by the Employees' Insurance Court under that Act.

The Supreme Court held the complaint maintainable. The medical benefit under the ESI scheme is not free: it is paid for by the contributions made by and on behalf of the insured person, so the insured person hires the service for consideration and is a consumer, and negligence in providing it is a deficiency in service. Following Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha and Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Shiv Kumar Joshi, the Court applied the principle that the Consumer Protection Act provides an additional remedy that is not in derogation of other laws, so the existence of a mechanism under the ESI Act does not by itself bar the consumer remedy.