Mrs. Rajyalakshmi Rao, Member - This is an original complaint No. 685/92 filed in State Commission which was dismissed by an order dated 2nd December, 1993 and the hearing took place on an appeal by the complainant to the National Commission in First Appeal No. 82 of 1994 dated 30 May, 1997. The said appeal was disposed off remanding this case back to the State Commission with directions to both the parties to reappear in the State Commission. The order of National Commission further added that enough opportunity should be given to the complainant to lead evidence regarding medical negligence and the opposite parties to substantiate their allegations.

The complainant, Dr.(Ms.) Jasmine Patel argued the matter herself and then filed written arguments. The Opposite Parties(1) Dr. R.J. Maneksha, and(2) Dr. Bacha's Nursing Home were represented by Dr. M.S. Kamal, who filed written arguments. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

1. The complainant lost her kidney after an assault on her in Germany and she had put on excess weight. While she was in India, she happened to come in contact with Dr. R.J. Maneksha O.P. No.1, who according to her, persuaded her to undergo a cosmetic key-hole surgery(lipolysis) for removal of excess fat. He seems to have advised her that this excess fat may lead to hernia. The surgery was carried out on 16-10-1989 in Dr. Bacha's Nursing Home, the O.P. 2, and she was hospitalised for a period of 23 days from 16-10-1989 to 9-11-1989. The complainant alleged that O.P. 1 during the said operation used the instrument carelessly, resulting in damage to her small bowel culminating into perforative Peritonitis and injured the small intestine. She added that her condition became critical and had to undergo a second surgery on 21-10-1989 by Dr. Pratap Shroff.

2. It is her case that the corset was pulled on to her operated and injured abdomen due to which she could not breath and then they had to cut open the corset within an hour Complainant alleged that this forceful application of the corset caused a twist in the large intestine. After few days of the operation, post operational complications arose and she was operated upon on21-10-1989 by Dr. Pratap Shroff as her condition became critical. It is her case that Dr. Shrof has certified on 10-5-1999 that O.P. 1 has caused severe permanent damage to the complaint and she alleges that O.P. l performed the operation which was performed in careless manner and caused permanent damage which arose out of his wrong diagnosis of the problem.

3. There is a discussion by both the parties regarding an incident of complainant's fall in the hospital on 19-10-1989. Complainant states that she was forced to take a walk down the corridor in the hospital by two nurses under the supervision of the Head nurse on the advice of the• doctor O.P. l. She categorically emphasizes that she only lurched at the window and supported herself by putting her hands on the window. She was wheeled back to her bed and again due to weakness she supported herself by hands on the bed. This compulsory walk and the enema in the evening aggravated the injury of intestine perforation and eventually caused the onset of peritonitis. She refers to a visit by her friend Dr. Noshir Siahiar and how he sounded the alarm on her deteriorating condition to OP No.1. An emergency operation was performed at midnight of 21-10-1989 to rectify the mistakes of the first operation itself shows the direct link to prove her grievance regarding the gross negligence arising out of wrong diagnosis and a medical blunder of perforating the intestine.

4. The complainant filed an expert opinion from Dr. Robert Festge, a plastic Surgeon from Hamburg, Germany dated 20-3-1995 which is placed on record. Based on a clinical examination of the patient on 7-2-1995 and the previous history of the case of the reports given by the complainant, Dr. Festge has opined that the liposuction was incorrectly carried out which led to the perforati