The Navsari District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (CDRC) has directed a Chennai-based stem cell banking company to pay ₹20 lakh to a 30-year-old woman after finding that it failed to fulfil a commitment related to stem cell treatment.
According to the case records, the woman had entered into an agreement with LifeCell International Pvt Ltd while she was pregnant. Under the agreement, the company would preserve the stem cells of her newborn child for 75 years and make them available whenever needed for medical treatment.
The agreement also stated that if the stored stem cell samples were not suitable for treatment, the company would try to obtain matching samples from another stem cell bank. If it failed to do so, it would pay ₹20 lakh towards treatment expenses.
The woman, a resident of a village in Gandevi taluka, enrolled in the stem cell preservation programme on January 3, 2024. She paid ₹64,710 and signed the agreement with the company.
She gave birth to a boy on January 20, 2024, at a hospital in Navsari. After the birth, the child’s stem cell samples were collected and stored by the company.
In March 2024, the woman’s husband was diagnosed with leukaemia. Following medical advice, she approached the company in April 2024 and submitted all the necessary medical reports.
The company later provided the stored stem cell samples, but doctors found that they did not match the requirements for her husband’s treatment.
On May 19, 2024, the woman informed the company that suitable stem cell samples were available through another stem cell registry in Chennai and sought help in obtaining them.
She eventually obtained the required samples through that registry and spent ₹23.9 lakh on treatment. In addition, she incurred nearly ₹5 lakh in other related expenses.
Claiming deficiency in service and unfair trade practices, the woman approached the Navsari CDRC on July 11, 2025, seeking reimbursement of treatment expenses and compensation.
During the proceedings, the company’s advocate appeared before the commission in September 2025 and sought time to file a reply. However, despite being given opportunities on three subsequent hearing dates, no reply was submitted.
The woman’s lawyer argued that all documents requested by the company had been provided. He also stated that the company itself had supplied details of the third-party registry from which the matching stem cells were eventually obtained.
According to the woman’s side, despite collecting a substantial premium and knowing that alternative matching samples were available, the company neither arranged the treatment support nor paid the compensation promised under the agreement.
The company argued that sample mismatches are a natural occurrence and that a child’s stem cells match a parent in only a limited number of cases. It also claimed that the family independently chose to obtain samples from a third-party registry and did not provide all documents needed to process the compensation claim.
After examining the evidence, the commission observed that the company repeatedly sought documents without clearly stating what information was missing, even though it had received the relevant records.
The commission further noted that if additional clarification was required, the company could have contacted the treating doctors directly. Instead, it found that the repeated correspondence appeared to be intended to harass the complainant.
The commission held that after directing the woman to a third-party registry and then refusing to honour the compensation clause in the agreement, the company had committed a serious deficiency in service.
As a result, the Navsari CDRC ordered the company to pay ₹20 lakh with 9% annual interest. The commission also awarded ₹50,000 towards compensation for mental agony, physical hardship and litigation expenses.
Also Read: Ahmedabad Youth Arrested For Sending Drugs To UK Through Instagram Contacts https://www.vibesofindia.com/ahmedabad-youth-arrested-226-crore-crypto-drug-racket-uk-instagram-network/
