Shreya Gupta
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) dismissed a complaint filed by Moses Pinto, alleging violations under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. The complaint was based on a claim of medical negligence involving a laparoscopic appendectomy performed by Dr. P. Ravi Teja at Victor Hospital. Pinto alleged that the hospital misrepresented the surgeon’s qualifications, misleading consumers and gaining an unfair competitive advantage over compliant healthcare providers. However, the CCI ruled that the allegations did not pertain to competition concerns under the Act and closed the matter under Section 26(2).
According to the complaint, Pinto underwent surgery at Victor Hospital on August 1, 2023, under the care of Dr. P. Ravi Teja, after being admitted with symptoms of acute appendicitis. Following the surgery, he experienced severe complications, including persistent abdominal pain and infection, which ultimately led to the development of an enterocutaneous fistula. Seeking further treatment, Pinto was referred to BLK-MAX Hospital in New Delhi, where he underwent a corrective procedure on September 1, 2023. The second surgery revealed that a portion of his appendix and a fecalith had been left behind, necessitating the resection of approximately 10 cm of his small intestine. Pinto claimed that the errors and omissions in the first surgery resulted in both physical suffering and financial hardship.
Subsequently, Pinto filed a complaint with the Goa Medical Council, which conducted a disciplinary inquiry. It was found that Dr. Ravi Teja lacked valid registration with the Goa Medical Council at the time of the surgery, which was in violation of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019. Despite this, Victor Hospital allegedly allowed him to continue practicing without informing patients of his lack of credentials. The Goa Medical Council’s judgment on July 19, 2024, acknowledged that Dr. Ravi Teja had practiced without registration for over ten months and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000, reprimanding him for his actions. However, the broader issue of an unregistered practitioner providing critical healthcare services remained unaddressed.
Pinto argued that the hospital’s continued promotion of Dr. Ravi Teja as a qualified consultant surgeon was a deliberate attempt to mislead patients and gain an unfair competitive advantage. He contended that this misrepresentation undermined consumer choice and market dynamics by disadvantaging ethical and compliant healthcare providers who incurred higher costs to meet regulatory standards. Additionally, he alleged that Victor Hospital abused its dominant position in the healthcare market in Margao, South Goa, by leveraging its reputation to conceal regulatory violations, misleading patients into believing they were receiving care from a qualified and registered surgeon. He claimed that this practice distorted the healthcare market by pressuring other providers to either adopt similar unethical practices or risk losing patients.
The CCI, however, found that the complaint primarily pertained to medical negligence and regulatory compliance rather than competition law violations. It held that the alleged misrepresentation of a surgeon’s qualifications did not necessarily impact competition in the market. The Commission reiterated that its role under the Competition Act is to regulate anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position, rather than matters of medical negligence or professional misconduct, which fall under the jurisdiction of medical regulatory authorities. Consequently, the CCI dismissed the complaint without directing an investigation.
This decision aligns with previous judicial precedents where the CCI has consistently ruled that grievances related to professional misconduct or regulatory violations do not fall within its jurisdiction unless they directly affect market competition. In cases such as Samir Agrawal v. ANI Technologies (2020), the CCI emphasized that misleading practices must result in an appreciable adverse effect on competition to be considered under the Act. By dismissing Pinto’s complaint, the CCI reaffirmed that competition law is not a substitute for sectoral regulations governing professional ethics and consumer protection in healthcare.
Case Title: Moses Pinto v. Victor Hospital
Instagram: Click here.
LinkedIn: Click here.
For Collaboration and Business: info.desikaanoon@gmail.com