IMPORTANT POINT
Death due to medical complications is not always result of medical negligence.

Anupam Dasgupta, Member— Aggrieved by the order dated 09.08.2003 of the Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal (hereafter, ‘the State Commission’) the original complainant has filed this appeal. It may be noted at the outset that while one of the Members of the State Commission allowed the complaint; it was dismissed by a majority order (of another Member, supported by the President).

2. The complaint pertained to alleged medical negligence and deficiency in service in the treatment of Kausar Insaf, the 26-year old daughter of the complainant who had multiple stones in her right kidney and ureter. She consulted Dr. Azam Nawaz (opposite party no. 1 - OP 1) of Asma Nawaz Nursing Home, Bhopal for her problems. OP 1, after getting the necessary investigations done, suggested surgery for removal of the stones. Kausar was admitted to the nursing home (OP 4) of OP 1 (and other OPs) on 16.07.2000, underwent the planned surgery on 17.07.2000 and her renal stones were removed. The complainant alleged that after the surgery, Kausar developed swelling on her face and other parts of the body and blood started to ooze out from the sutures. At about 11:30 p.m. the same night, there was allegedly excessive bleeding from the site of the surgery which Kausar’s mother, attending on Kausar, immediately brought to the notice of the nurse on duty. However, allegedly, the nurse neither reported this bleeding to OP 1nor did she allow Kausar’s mother to contact OP 1 on telephone; in fact, allegedly the nurse did not even allow Kausar’s mother access to the telephone. It was further alleged that though OP 1 instructed the nurse on 18.07.2000 to transfuse the same blood that had been arranged prior to the surgery, no tests were performed before the transfusion. As the blood from the sutures continued to ooze out even on 19.07.2000, OP 1 discussed the matter with the other three OPs and decided to conduct another surgery. However, after the second surgery on 19.07.2000 at about 5 p.m., OP 1 informed the complainant that his daughter was in a serious condition and had to be shifted to another hospital with better facilities. She was accordingly shifted to Vardaan Hospital, Bhopal. After examining the patient on admission to Vardaan Hospital, the Doctors there allegedly informed the complainant that she had a very poor chance of survival. Kausar ultimately died at Vardaan Hospital on 28.07.2000. The complainant, alleging that his daughter died due to acts of negligence on the part of the opposite parties, filed a complaint before the State Commission and claimed a compensation of Rs.19,30,722.25. The OP doctors submitted their written version before the State Commission denying all the allegations in the complaint and also filed their affidavits as well as various documents relating to the treatment of Kausar at the nursing home. As noted above, by its majority order the State Commission dismissed the complaint after considering the pleadings, evidence and material brought on record.

3. We have heard Mr. Umesh Nigam, learned counsel for the appellant/complainant and Mr. Deepesh Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents/opposite parties and perused the records. At the time of hearing, both the appellant and OP 1 were also present.

4(i) It needs to be observed at the outset that neither in the memorandum of appeal nor in the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant before us was there any sensible attempt to show how the findings of the State Commission, based on detailed appreciation of the entire medical record of the patient (made available by the OPs) and relevant medical literature as it is, could be faulted. It is also noted in the order of the State Commission that the complainant made no attempt to produce any medical literature, leave alone expert medical opinion, to show how and when, in the course of treatment of Kausar, any of the OPs committed acts of omission or commission which could amount to m