IMPORTANT POINT
Treatment must be done only after proper diagnosis.

Jagroop Singh Mahal, Member— The OPs have filed these three appeals under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 31.12.2009, passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum), directing the OPs to refund a sum of Rs.1,01,858 the expenses incurred by the complainant on her treatment in the Inscol Multi Speciality Hospital, Chandigarh, Rs.6,91,095 incurred in Fortis Hospital, Mohali and PGI, Chandigarh and Rs.10,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by her. The order was directed to be complied with jointly and severally by OPs within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order failing which OPs were made liable to refund the aforesaid total amount of Rs.17,92,953 to the complainant along with penal interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 24.7.2007 till its realization. The liability of the Insurance Company i.e. OP No.6 was limited to the extent of Insurance Policy issued in favour of Dr. Jayant Banerji (OP3) only. All the three appeals are being disposed of through this order.

2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the complainant was a patient of diabetes for the last 10 years prior to her admission in OP No.1 Inscol Multi Specialty Hospital and she was under medical supervision of OP No.3 i.e. Dr. Jayant Banerji. It was averred that on 1.8.2005, the complainant started shivering and felt mild fever accompanied by pain in her left leg, for which at about 4.00 p.m., she visited the clinic of OP No.3 where some preliminary tests were carried out. The complainant was thereafter advised to visit Prime Diagnostic Centre for check up and procedural tests, which was accordingly done by the complainant. Accordingly, High Resolution Harmonic Eco Cardiography test was performed on her at Prime Diagnostic Centre by Dr. U.P. Singh and the report thereof was placed on record as Annexure C1. Subsequently, OP No.3, after perusing the report of Harmonic Eco Cardiography, advised the complainant to get her checked up from Dr. Sudhir Saxena and the same was accordingly done. After examining the complainant, Dr. Sudhir Saxena gave her some medicines and further advised immediate hospitalization for carrying out certain investigations such as D-Dimer Test, repeat Eco Test and Sprial CT Chest Scan etc. It was alleged by the complainant that Dr. Sudhir Saxena again sent her to OP No.3 for further management of her treatment. At the advice of OP No. 3 the complainant got herself admitted in OP No.1 Hospital in the evening of 1.8.05 itself in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) where Ultra Sound Test, Doppler Test were carried out. It was alleged that none of the tests as advised by Dr. Sudhir Saxena was carried out in order to ascertain conclusively that she was suffering from Pulmonary Embolism. As per the complainant, her condition started deteriorating during night and injection namely TPA Tissue Plasmogim Activator (also known as Actilyse) was recommended to be administered to her. The case of the complainant was that as per the TPA Instruction Manual as well as Consumer Medicine Information, the said injection was to be administered only after confirmation of Pulmonary Embolism disease and that too by a well qualified physician experienced in the use of Thrombolytic treatment and at a place where all facilities to monitor its use are available as the giving of this injection may result in dangerous side effects, which may need immediate care and treatment. But despite the aforesaid instructions, the said injection was administered without confirming pulmonary embolism on the complainant and by a person who was not competent to administer the said injection. It was next averred that on 2.8.2005, after the administration of the injection, the condition of the complainant deteriorated, she went into shock and breathlessness but no ventilator was made availa