IMPORTANT POINT
Limitation will start only when patient had come to know about factum of medical negligence.

Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member—Complainant has filed this complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short ‘the Act’) against opposite parties (hereinafter referred as Ops) on the averments that she was having knee problem. The grand-son of the complainant was injured and she was coming to Fortis Hospital. During his treatment, the complainant and her son visited the hospital and consulted Op No. 2, who claimed himself to be an expert in connection with knee problem and he recommended for total knee replacement. According to the assurance given by Op No. 2, she agreed to do and got herself admitted there on 19.3.2012. She was diagnosed about the present illness with history of difficulty in walking for the last 2-3 years. At that time vital organs of the complainant were in order. After admission, Xray of both knee, AP and lateral was done on 19.3.2012, which revealed severe Osteoarthritis. The test further revealed Hypokinisia of Apical, lateral Wall, LVEF 46% and no MR/AR/TR. The surgery was conducted on 20.3.2012 but the complainant found/realized some problem of severe pain in the back on 21.3.2013 and feeling numbness in one leg. It was informed to Op No. 2 and others on duty but the attendants intimated that the problem was because of effect of anaesthesia and pain killers and that the complainant will be all right in a day or so. However, on the next day, she felt numbness in the other leg. It was also brought to the notice of the Doctors but they made a standard reply. However, on consistent complaint by complainant and her attendants, the Doctors re-examined her and referred the case to Neurosurgeon Op No. 4. As per his inspection, MRI Spine Lumber was done on 23.3.2012 which showed collection of some bacteria, suggesting spinal Subdural/ Epidural Hematoma. The complainant was taken for Laminectomy under the Inchargeship of Dr. V.K. Khosla and surgery was performed and number of units of blood were transfused. It was observed that anaesthesia given by Op No. 3 was not proper, accordingly, they performed the corrective surgery. However, the delay to perform the corrective surgery was a major act of negligence along with incorrect infusion of anaesthesia. Even Ops refused to divulge the name of Op No. 3. As per the advice of Ops, the complainant had been reporting to Ops for follow up treatment. The complainant and her attendants paid a sum of Rs. 2,90,000/- in all for hospitalization, treatment and follow up. Due to delay in taking corrective measures, her lower limbs have been paralysed. Her left foot does not move at all and have no sensation of stool and urine, catheter has to be inserted in her urinary tract. She has totally become disabled and unable to walk, sit or stand properly. It all happened due to medical negligence on the part of Ops. Accordingly, this complaint has been filed against Ops to pay compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/- on account of medical negligence, refund a sum of Rs. 2,90,000/- paid by the complainant to Ops and Rs. 1,10,000/- on account of medicines, Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of mental, physical, financial harassment and sufferings, Rs. 10,000/- per month as attendant expenses and Rs. 55,000/- as litigation expenses.

2. Written statement was filed by Op Nos. 1 to 4 taking preliminary objections that there was no negligence on the part of Ops, complaint is flagrant abuse of the process of law and has been filed just to harass, malign and blackmail Ops. Brief matrix of the facts are that complainant was suffering from Osteoarthritis of both the knee, which were required to be removed due to advance stages, the complainant was known case of hyper tension, coronary artery disease, cardiac dysfunction, Hypokinesia of apical and lateral wall of heart and was taking the treatment, blood thinners were required to be stopped 5 days before taking up the surgery.