YOGESH VS PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
J.M. Malik, Presiding Member
YOGESH - Appellant
Versus
DR. PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERS - Respondents
Revision Petition Nos. 3051, 3225, 3344 of 2012 from Order dated 14.5.2012 in First Appeal Nos. 3243, 3307, 3111/2007 of Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula
Decided on : 03-02-2014

Headnote:
Medical Negligence - Consumer Protection Act - [Gas Gangrene] - [Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 26] - The court discussed the medical negligence and the duty of care owed to the patient by the medical practitioners. It highlighted the principles of negligence and the application of res ipsa loquitur in the case. The court dismissed the revision petition filed by the complainant and also dismissed the revisions filed by the respondents with costs.
Fact of the Case:

The complainant fell from a Cantilever and received multiple injuries and fracture in his leg. He underwent treatment from multiple doctors and hospitals, ultimately leading to the amputation of his leg. The complainant filed a complaint seeking compensation for the treatment expenses and mental and physical tension.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the medical practitioners were negligent in their duty of care towards the patient. It dismissed the revision petition filed by the complainant and also dismissed the revisions filed by the respondents with costs.
Issues: The issues involved medical negligence, duty of care, and the liability of the medical practitioners for the treatment provided to the complainant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles of negligence and the duty of care owed to the patient by the medical practitioners. It also discussed the application of res ipsa loquitur in determining the negligence in the case.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision petition filed by the complainant and also dismissed the revisions filed by the respondents with costs of Rs. 10,000 each under Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, to be paid to the complainant within 90 days from the date of receipt of the order.

ORDER

Mr. Justice J.M. Malik, Presiding Member -This order shall decide above mentioned three revision petitions which pertain to the same incident and arise out from the same common judgment rendered by the State Commission.

2. Sh. Yogesh, the complainant in this case, fell down from the Cantilever/Chhajja and received multiple injuries and fracture in his leg on 2.4.1999, at about 4.00 p.m. He was taken to Aman Hospital , run by Dr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, OP1. His right leg was plastered. The complainant was advised to come after 5 days. The complainant suffered a lot of pain, on 4.4.1999 and approached OP1. However, OP1 was not available in the hospital. The parties invited my invitation towards medical record, from Aman Hospital, which runs as follows:

"Mr. Yogesh Date : 2.4.1999

20 years, Male

Fracture Calcanium (Right)

Sedation, Close Reduction Dose

Plaster of pariss back slab applied

Possibilityof open Reduction/Internal

Fixation/Late Subtalar

Arthrodesis

Adv.

X-ray after 2 days Raise the part

Toe Movements

10 days' Tablet Orthodes (15)

POP illegible (0-0-0 thrice daily) x 5 days".

3. Thereafter, the complainant was taken to Dr. Birendra Singh of Amrit Clinic , OP2. OP2 x-rayed the right leg of the complainant and then inserted a pin for hanging weight and also operated the leg of the complainant. OP2 advised the complainant for blood transfusion on the next day, i.e. , 5.4.1999. The second certificate is of Amrit Clinic. The relevant portion, runs as hereunder:

"Amrit Clinic

Mohna Road, Ballabgarh-121 004

Name: Mr. Yogesh

Age : 20 years, Sex: Male

Date: Address:

Apart from x-ray, treatment of all

diseases of bones, joints, muscles,

nerves by medicines, plaster &

operation is done here."

4. The complainant's blood was transfused by Dr. Naresh Jindal of Uncha Gaon, OP, at the residence of the complainant, with the help of Dr. Birendra Singh, OP2. Subsequently, OP2 advised him for getting treatment from any Government Hospital. The foot started foul smell on 6.4.1999 and pus cells were also present in bulk. The complainant called up Dr. Naresh Jindal and Dr. Birendra Singh. Dr. Birendra Singh took forcibly the papers belonging to his treatment, along with X-ray report. The envelop of X-ray was left with the complainant. Trilok Chand and Ratan Kumar, brothers of the complainant were also present there and they informed the father of the complainant that Dr. Birendra Singh had taken away the medical papers.

5. Father of the complainant took the complainant to Holy Family Hospital, New Delhi, as the complainant was in a precarious condition. Holy Family Hospital referred him to AIIMS, New Delhi and from AIIMS, New Delhi, he was shifted to Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. There is record of Holy Family Hospital, the relevant para runs as follows:

"Holy Family Hospita, New Delhi-25

Cellulitis Advised under General Anaesthesia

Fasciotomy

G-Cal Blow knee amputation also Wound Debridement

Illegible Magnamycin

(Diagnosis)

Fracture right calcanium with ascending cellulites with gas gangrene.

Adv:

Admission in Orthopaedic ICU

Regret No Beds Available

Referred to

All India Institute of Medical Sciences/Safdarjung Hospital."

6. Safdarjung Hospital diagnosed that due to ill-treatment, gas-gangrene was reported with the foul smell, along with pus cells. There is a Discharge Slip from the Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, placed on record, as Annexure P-9. The following extract is germane to the present controversy.

"Discharge

Yogesh Unit II, Tue, Fri

21/M DOA (date of admission) -6.4.1999

HRD163171-DOD (date of discharge) 17.4.1999

WD-27/42

X-Ray

Gas shadow c (with) # (Fracture) Calcaneum

Plan

B/K (Below knee) amputation right

Operation

A/K (Above knee) right amputation done (as muscles not viable upto knee) on 6.4.1999

in EOT (Emergency Operation Theatre)