IMPORTANT POINT
No cure is no negligence.

Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Member—The instant complaint is filed by Shri Fazal-E-Ilahy, the complainant, against Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences & Research, Bangalore/OP, for alleged medical negligence causing death of complainant’s father because of not providing proper treatment. There was negligence during handling critical stage of the patient.

2. Brief facts relevant in this complaint are that on 12.8.2015, Mr. M. K. Jameel, father of the complainant, (since deceased, hereinafter referred as ‘the patient’) suffered urinary retention with pain and respiratory distress. He approached OPD at OP/Hospital. He was investigated and diagnosed as fluid in both the lungs, with urinary retention due to BPH. He was admitted in ICU-3 of OP/hospital. The emergency measure, Foley’s Catheterization, was advised for passage of urine. It was alleged that despite the critical condition of the patient, the doctors at OP-Hospital gave only insulin dose, no catheter was placed and left the patient unattended. The patient was restless and unable to sleep throughout that night. The blood investigations revealed reduction in Platelet Count (Thrombocytopenia) and increase in potassium (k+) level (Hyperkalemia). The patient was unattended by senior doctors, only untrained medical students attended him. It is further alleged that the doctors did not bother to do a simple procedure of Foley’s catherization to remove patient’s urine. The platelet count was decreasing but no platelet transfusion was given, therefore, patient’s vital organs got damaged. Thus, it was a negligent behavior of the OP doctors. Therefore, for proper treatment, the complainant decided to shift the patient to Fortis Hospital, but OP did not allow for shift till 11.30 a.m. of the next day, because there was no billing staff and other official to sign the medical file of the patient. Also the doctors at OP informed the complainant that, the hospital is Cardiac hospital, hence, nothing can be done for the patient. After a long delay, on 13.8.2015, the patient was discharged and thereafter he was shifted to Fortis Hospital for further treatment. In the Fortis Hospital, immediate Foley Catherization, blood tests, platelet transfusion and dialysis were performed but the patient could not be saved. Therefore, the complainant filed the complaint under Section 21(A)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before this Commission and prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs.1,18,76,656/- under different heads.

3. We have heard Mr. Pawan Kumar Ray, learned counsel for the complainant at the stage of admission. Learned counsel reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint. We have put specific question to the counsel regarding the treatment and diagnosis of the patient. Counsel brought our attention towards OPD and IPD sheets of OP-hospital. We have perused the entire medical record submitted along with complaint. It is clearly mentioned in the OPD slip that patient approached the OP/hospital on 12.8.2015 and initial diagnosis made was “DM II, HTN, p/w ACCHTN, LVF, CKD, Hyperkalemia, Thrombocytopenia.” The patient’s age was 74 years. The admission sheet shows that the patient was admitted at 9.29 p.m. On 12.8.2015, the investigations reveal bilateral plural effusion. The Discharge summary also clearly reveals, the patient was discharged against medical advice (DAMA) with the final diagnosis as,

“Accelerated Hypertension

With Left ventricular Failure,

With CKD with Hyper kalemda with thrombocytopenia

DM type 2

Hypertension.”

4. The medical record reveals of OP-Hospital, the patient was investigated properly. The emergency treatment given was Inj. NTG 0.6 ml for IV, Inj Lasix 40 mg IV (40-40-20), Inj. ® Insulin according to sugar level. It is pertinent to note that, the discharge note is clearly mentioned as:

“Pt. has been advised for further treatment but pt. attender wants to discharge against medical advise. Prognosis has been explained.”

5. In furtherance, we have per