Back
KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENAGALORE
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chandrashekaraiah, President & Mrs. Rama Ananth, Member
S. MURALIDHAR & ANR.—Complainants
versus
BASAPPA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL & ORS.—Opposite Parties
Complaint No. 55 of 1996—Decided on 5.11.2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Complainant :Mr. A. Mohan Ram, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties :Mr. Basava Prabhu Patil, Advocate.
Headnote:
negligence - medical treatment - [Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(i), Section 2(1)(d), Section 2(1)(c), Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(i), Section 2(1)(d), Section 2(1)(c)] - The court discussed the negligence in testing the blood for HIV before transfusing it into the patient's body, the responsibility of the hospital management, and the impact of negligence on the patient's life. The court found that the hospital's failure to test the blood for HIV before transfusion constituted negligence, resulting in the patient contracting HIV, and awarded compensation to the complainants.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant sought damages from the hospital alleging negligence in the treatment. The complainant underwent an operation and subsequently developed jaundice. Later, it was discovered that the complainant was HIV positive due to the hospital's failure to test the blood before transfusion.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the hospital's negligence in not testing the blood for HIV before transfusion resulted in the complainant contracting HIV, impacting his life and lifespan.
Issues: The main issue was whether the hospital was negligent in testing the blood for HIV before transfusing it into the patient's body.
Ratio Decidendi: The hospital's failure to test the blood for HIV before transfusion constituted negligence, resulting in the patient contracting HIV.
Final Decision: The complaint was allowed in part, and the hospital was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 to the complainants with interest at 10% p.a.
Mr. Justice Chandrashekariah, President—The complainants have filed this complaint claiming damages of Rs. 10,00,000/- from O.Ps. alleging negligence in the treatment.
2. The facts in this case are follows :
The complainant-I approached O.P. 1 for treatment for the fracture which he suffered in the accident on 31.12.1995. O.P. 1 advised the complainant-1 to get himself admitted in the said hospital for treatment. On the said advice the complainant-1 got himself admitted as in-patient in O.P. 1 hospital on 31.12.1995. On 2.1.1996 O.P. 1 directed complainant-1 to bring his close relatives to donate blood since the complainant blood group was found to be ‘O’ positive. Accordingly the complainant had brought 4 persons by name Adishesha, Ganesha, Sathyanarayana and Sridhar whose blood group was found to be ‘O’ positive as per the pathology report given by O.P. 1 hospital. The blood drawn from the above 4 persons was transfused into the body of the complainant-1 when he underwent an operation on 3.1.1996 of his right thigh and K-nailling with bone grafting.
3. Immediately thereafter, the com-plainant-1 developed jaundice and, therefore, he could not be operated on his right arm in O.P. 1 hospital. The complainant-1 was discharged on 16.1.1996 on the advice of O.P. 1.
4. On 9.2.1996 the complainant-1 and his family members noticed that pus was oozing out from the wound where the operation was conducted on his right thigh. Immediately thereafter, the complainant was admitted to J.S.S. Hospital for further treatment. The JSS Hospital on X-ray found that the bone was not properly set and he was advised to undergo medical operation to set it properly. Before operation as required the blood of the complainant was tested. It was found that the complainant-1 was HIV positive and thereafter, he shifted to ‘isolated ward’ as a precautionary measure. In order to get confirmation the blood of the complainant-1 was sent for further investigation to M/s. Anand Diagnostics Laboratory, Bangalore. The said laboratory confirmed it as HIV positive vide its letter dated 23.2.1996.
5. The complainant-1 after having come to know that he is HIV positive issued a telegram notice to O.P. 1 on 23.2.1996 through his Counsel calling upon O.P. 1 to send the entire case sheet for further investigation and further treatment as per the advice of JSS Medical Hospital, Mysore. It is further stated that the complainant-1 has issued another notice dated 8.3.1996 calling upon O.P. 1 to send all the records relating to his treatment. It is alleged that no doubt, the said notices were replied the records relating to treatment were not sent by O.P. 1.
6. The further case of the complainant-1 is that O.P. 1 had not tested the blood for HIV of one Sri Sridhar whose blood was proved to be HIV positive before transfusing the said blood to the complainant-1.
7. The complainant is aged about 26 years and had married about 11 months prior to the operation and at that time his wife was carrying. On these facts the complainant has claimed damages of Rs. 10,00,000/- from O.Ps.
8. The case of O.Ps. in their version is that complainant-1 was admitted to O.P. 1 hospital on 31.12.1995 with history of road traffic accident and he was advised to undergo an operation. The orthopaedic surgeon DR. Nityanand Rao i.e., O.P. 3 operated the complainant on 3.1.1996. The further case of O.Ps. is that out of 13 persons, the blood group of 4 persons by name Sridhar, Adishesha, Ganesh and Sathyanarayana were found to be compatible of ‘O’ positive. Further it is stated that the blood of the above 4 persons was tested and found to be, (a) HIV I and II; (b) HBs Ag; (c) VDRL, (d) blood for M.P. and found negative. O.Ps. have also admitted the fact that the blood of 4 persons was transfused to complainant -1. Further O.Ps. have admitted the receipt of the legal notice issued by the complainant-1, but they have denied the statement made on behalf of the complainant-1 regarding denial of record relating to th
