Back
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH
Sham Sunder (Retd.) President and Dev Raj, Member
Government Multi Speciality Hospital, Through its Medical Superintendent —Appellant
versus
Rajinder Kumar & Ors. —Respondents
First Appeal Nos. 71 of 2013 &
First Appeal No. 59 of 2013
Decided on 16.7.2013
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Sh. Vishal Sodhi, Advocate.
For the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2:Ms. Hemlata Issar, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 3:Sh. R.D. Sehgal, Advocate
For the Respondent No. 4:Sh. Subhash Chander, Advocate Proxy for Sh.Chaman Lal, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 5:Sh. Ravi Kumar, Advocate Proxy for Sh. Arvind Chauhan, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
As long as doctor performs his duties and exercises ordinary degree of professional skill and competence, he cannot be held guilty of medical negligence.
Headnote:(i) Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 2(1)(d) and 2(1)(o)—Medical services—Medical negligence—Since complainants fell within definition of Consumers as they hired services of Opposite Parties for consideration and question for determination involved related to their alleged medical negligence, Consumer Complaint was maintainable. (Paras 15 and 16)
(ii) Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 15 and 17—Medical services—Medical negligence—Death of patient—Compensation of Rs.5 Lakhs and cost of Rs.10,000 awarded by District Forum—As long as doctor performs his duties and exercises ordinary degree of professional skill and competence, he cannot be held guilty of medical negligence—It is imperative that doctor must be able to perform his professional duties with free mind—Doctor performed his duties and exercised ordinary degree of professional skill and competence in treating deceased—There was no laps on part of Doctor in diagnosing disease from which patient was suffering and in prescribing medicines/injections which were required to be given to patient—District Forum was wrong in holding that Doctor was guilty of medical negligence—Amount of compensation reduced. (Paras 16 to 21, 23 to 32)
Sham Sunder (Retd.), President—This order shall dispose of the aforesaid two First Appeal Nos.59 of 2013, titled as Dr.Arvinder Joshi v. Rajinder Kumar and Ors. and 71 of 2013, titled as Government Multi Speciality Hospital v. Rajinder Kumar and Ors., arising out of the common majority order dated 10.12.2012, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as District Forum only), vide which, it accepted the Consumer Complaint bearing No.518 of 2010- Rajinder Kumar and Anr. v. Government Multi Speciality Hospital and Ors., and directed Opposite Parties No.1, 2 and 3, jointly and severally, as under:—
“Hence the present complaint is allowed against the Opposite Parties No. 1, 2 & 3, jointly and severally. The present complaint is dismissed qua Opposite Party No. 4. The OPs 1, 2 & 3 are directed as under:
(a) To pay Rs.5 Lacs (Five Lacs) as consolidated amount of compensation.
(b) To pay Rs. 10,000-/ as litigation costs.
This order of ours shall be complied within 45 days of its receipt. There after the OPs shall be liable for an interest at the @18 % per annum on the amount of compensation of Rs.5 Lacs apart from the litigation expenses, till it is paid”.
2. The complaint qua Opposite Party No.4, was dismissed, by the District Forum.
3. One Member of the District Forum, recorded the dissenting order.
4. The facts, in brief, are that Smt. Tarawati (now deceased), aged about 55 years, was taken to the Government Multi Speciality Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as the Hospital only)/Opposite Party No.1, at around 6:30 p.m. on 26.05.2010, by the complainants, as she was suffering from stomachache, fever and dehydration. After examination by the Doctor, on duty, Smt. Tarawati (now deceased), was admitted in the Emergency Ward, on the same day i.e 26.05.2010. According to the complainants, on the night intervening 26/27.05.2010, Smt. Tarawati was only given a glucose drip. It was stated that Smt. Tarawati (now deceased) was neither given any medicine nor any injection nor any tablet, from the Hospital supply, nor was the attendant called, to purchase the same, for her treatment. However, the Nurses, who were on duty, told complainant No.1, that the patient- Smt. Tarawati (now deceased), was responding to the treatment. She was shifted to the Female Surgical Ward, (hereinafter to be referred as the FSW), thereafter. It was further stated that the Doctors and Nurses, who were on duty, on the said night, locked the FSW, from outside, to save themselves, from the complaints of the patients. It was further stated that the condition of Smt. Tarawati (now deceased) deteriorated, and she was crying with pain, for the whole night. It was further stated that the attendant was constantly knocking at the door of the FSW, with a request to unlock the same, so that the Doctor and the Nurse could be called for treatment of the patient, but to no avail. It was further stated that, on 27.05.2010, at around 5.45 AM., the patient- Smt. Tarawati (now deceased), was having no sign of life and despite repeated requests, none from the Hospital staff was present in the FSW, to provide her treatment.
5. It was further stated that, when the complainants raised hue and cry, Dr.Arvinder Joshi/Opposite Party No.2, attended the patient- Smt. Tarawati (now deceased), at 6.00 a.m. on 27.05.2010. After checking, he directed to administer her glucose, after giving chest pump, whereas, Smt. Tarawati, had already expired, for want of proper treatment. It was further stated that after realizing their negligence, the Hospital Authorities did not hand over any documents/ prescription slip/admission slip, to the complainants, just to cover up their lapse. The Hospital Authorities also did not perform autopsy/post mortem on the dead body of Smt. Tarawati, with an intention to hide
