Back
JHARKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, RANCHI
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Choudhary S.N. Mishra, President;
Mr. Suphal Hansda & Mrs. Kalyani Kar Roy, Members
DEVENDRA SINGH—Petitioner
versus
BOKARO GENERAL HOSPITAL & ORS.—Opposite Parties
Complaint Case No. 9 of 2004—Decided on 20.5.2005
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Petitioner:Mr. Satish Bakshi, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 :Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party No. 3 :Mrs. Jaswant Kaur Mazumdar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party No. 4 : None.
For the Opposite Party No. 5 :Mr. P.C. Roy, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party No. 7 :Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(g) - Medical negligence - Fracture in leg - Initial plastering at the hands of Op too light which remained 24 hours causing gangrene - Amputation of left leg - No x-ray taken after application of plaster of paris to ascertain whether fractured portion was rightly set-up - Deficiency in service and negligence of OP established - Complaint
allowed.
Facts of the case :
(A)Present complaint is filed alleging negligence on the part of Op while treating the complainant. The complainant met with an accident and went to OP hospital for treatment. The OP2 found fracture in the left leg and after conducting operation applied plaster of paris and verbally advised the complainant to consult K, a doctor at Dhanbad. The complainant consulted K, who removed the plaster as it was tight and incomplete slab was applied to prevent further damage and referred the matter to another, hospital. Finally, the left leg of the complainant was removed as gangrene developed. OPs, however, denied negligence and deficiency in services an their part.
(B)The question arises in this complaint is whether gangrene developed because of tight plastering applied by the Op. According to K the patient has reported after 24 hours of the initial plastering at OP, but even then the condition of complainant could not be improved rather deteriorated. OPs should have taken X-ray after applying plaster of paris to ascertain whether fractured portion was rightly set-up. It is expected from any prudent doctor to ascertain the position of fractured wound after application of plaster of paris. Due to deficiency and negligence on the part of OP doctor while rendering the medical services gangrene developed which ultimately resulted in amputation of left leg.
(c)The complainant is a young man of 35 years with 1st class B.Sc degree. After considering the amount spent on medical care physical and mental suffering, the complainant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs.
Result : Complaint allowed.
Mr. Justice Choudhary S.N. Mishra, President—Initially the instant complaint was filed before the State Consumer Commission, Bihar, Patna which was registered as Complaint Case No. 78/2000. Consequent upon bifurcation of the State, cases related to Jharkhand stand transferred to this Commission and accordingly renumbered as Case No. 9/2004. In the instant original proceeding the following reliefs in terms of money have been sought for:
(1)
Medical Expenses
: Rs.
3,06,531.40
(2)
Attendents and other expenses
: Rs.
2,50,000.00
(3)
Loss in future income on account of leg for 30 years per year
: Rs.
8,00,000.00
(4)
Mental tension and physical treatment
: Rs.
5,00,000.00
(5)
Legal expenses
: Rs.
25,000.00
: Rs.
18,81,531.40
It would be relevant to mention here that the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has confined his relief in this proceeding only against the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 namely Bokaro General Hospital, Bokaro and Dr. S.N. Singh of the same hospital. Further learned Counsel seeks permission to delete all the names of respondents viz. 3 to 7 from the cause title which has been allowed, as a result, the complaint stands against opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 only.
2. The short facts giving rise to the disputes are as under :
The complainant met with an accident on 26.11.1999 and was treated by opposite party No. 2 Dr. S.N. Singh who is on the pay roll of Bokaro General Hospital. He plastered the fractured portion of the leg. It is alleged that the attending doctor has verbally advised the patient to have an expert opinion and accordingly he referred the complainant to Dr. Kailash Prasad, specialist in Orthopaedic surgery at Dhanbad. On the next day i.e., 27.11.1999 the complainant was examined by Dr. Kailash Prasad at his clinic namely Sharda Clinic, Dhanbad who opined that special plastering was necessary for which he demanded Rs. 5,000/- which was paid to him. According to the complainant, the earlier plaster was removed and fresh plastering was done by Dr. Kailash Prasad at Dhanbad. The complainant did not find any relief after plastering. Even after the assurance having been given by the doctor at Dhanbad, condition of the complainant was deteriorating day-by-day. According to the complainant, he remained 3 days in the hospital of Dr. Kailash Prasad of Dhanbad. However, he was discharged from his clinic on 29.11.1999 without assigning any reason and advised the complainant to go to Landsdowne Nursing Home, Calcutta. Dr. Prasad at Dhanbad had charged Rs. 22,500/- but no money receipt was given by the doctor Kailash Prasad inspite of the demand having been made. The petitioner/complainant reported at the Landsdowne Nursing Home, Calcutta on 30.11.1999. The complainant had spent Rs. 10,000/- and odd for operation charges and Rs. 13,359/- was charged against the medicines. It is further alleged that instead of improving, his condition was deteriorating day-by-day, ultimately, he was shifted to Wood Lands Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Calcutta, where he was under treatment of Dr. A.P. Dutta and Dr. Arun Mukherjee. The attending doctors of Wood Lands Hospital opined that because of wrong treatment and administration of medicines, it is now necessary to ampute his leg in order to save the life of the complainant. The attending doctors have also come to a conclsuion that because of the wrong and repeated plastering, gangerene developed. Ultimately, on 11.12.1999 portion below the knee was amputed and again remaining part of above knee was amputed on 31.12.1999. It is alleged that the complainant remained in the hospital from 7.12.1999 to 25.1.2000, during which period, he spent a sum of Rs. 2,57,982.10. According to the complainant the entire leg was amputed because of the wrong treatment and defective service rendered by Dr. S.N. Singh of Bokaro General Hospital, Dr. Kailash Prasad of Dhanbad and Landsdowne Nursing Home, Calcutta. According to the complainant, he suffered inexplicable physical pai
