The Navsari District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (CDRC) has ordered a Chennai-based stem cell banking company, LifeCell International Pvt Ltd, to pay Rs 20 lakh to a 30-year-old woman for failing to fulfill a contractual obligation related to stem cell treatment. The woman had entered into an agreement with the company to preserve her newborn child's stem cells for 75 years, with a guarantee of compensation if suitable samples were not provided.
Background of the Case
The woman, a resident of a village in Gandevi taluka, enrolled in the stem cell preservation program during her pregnancy. On January 3, 2024, she paid Rs 64,710 and signed an agreement with LifeCell. The company promised to preserve the child's stem cells for 75 years and make them available for medical treatment whenever needed. It also assured that if the stored samples did not match, it would try to procure matching samples from another stem cell bank. In case of failure, the company would be liable to pay Rs 20 lakh towards treatment expenses.
She gave birth to a boy on January 20, 2024, at a hospital in Navsari, and stem cell samples were collected and stored.
Medical Emergency and Company's Response
In March 2024, her husband was diagnosed with leukemia. Following medical advice, she approached the company in April and submitted all necessary reports. The company sent the stem cell samples, but doctors found they did not match her husband's requirements.
On May 19, 2024, she informed the company that suitable samples were available through another stem cell registry in Chennai and sought help in procuring them. She obtained the required samples through that registry, incurring treatment expenses of Rs 23.9 lakh, plus nearly Rs 5 lakh in other related costs.
Consumer Complaint and Proceedings
Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices, she approached the Navsari CDRC on July 11, 2025, seeking reimbursement of treatment expenses and compensation. During the proceedings, the company's advocate appeared in September 2025 and sought time to file a reply. However, no reply was submitted despite multiple opportunities.
The woman's counsel argued that all documents sought by the company were provided. He submitted that the company itself supplied details of the third-party registry from which matching stem cells were ultimately procured. Despite collecting a substantial premium and acknowledging the availability of alternative samples, the company neither arranged treatment support nor paid the promised compensation.
Company's Defense
The company contended that sample mismatches are a natural phenomenon and that a child's stem cells match a parent in only a limited number of cases. According to the company, the family independently chose to procure samples from a third-party registry and failed to provide all documents necessary to process the compensation claim.
Commission's Verdict
After examining the evidence, the commission observed that the company repeatedly sought documents without specifying what was lacking, despite receiving all relevant records. If further clarification was required, it could have contacted the treating doctors directly. Instead, the commission noted, the repeated correspondence appeared intended to harass the complainant.
The commission held that after directing the woman to a third-party registry and subsequently refusing to honor the compensation clause, the company committed a serious deficiency in service. The CDRC ordered the company to pay Rs 20 lakh with 9% annual interest, along with Rs 50,000 towards compensation for mental agony, physical hardship, and litigation expenses.
