IMPORTANT POINT
A doctor wiring a prescription advised by any doctor cannot be said to be negligent only on account of his writing such a prescription.

ORDER

V.K. Jain, Presiding Member

Late Shri Gyan Mishra, husband of the complainant Rupa Mishra and father of the other complainants visited opposite party No.2, Dr. Sandeep Agarwal, who is a Neurologist, for the first time on 02.5.2011 in Sahara Hospital, Lucknow. The said visit was followed by subsequent visits for consultation with Dr. Sandeep Agarwal. He was admitted in Sahara Hospital in Lucknow on 24.9.2012 and was discharged from there on 25.09.2012. During his stay in the said hospital, his pathology tests were done on 24.09.2012 and his serum creatinine was found to be 3.43 as against the range of 0.7 – 1.2. No further investigations or treatment for monitoring and management of the high serum creatinine which was indication of a kidney disease was advised to him at the time of his discharge from Sahara Hospital, nor was he advised to consult a Nephrologist for the said purpose. He was again admitted to Sahara Hospital on 09.12.2013 and was seen by Dr. Sandeep Agarwal as well as by opposite party No.3 Dr. Muffazal Ahmed, who is a Nephrologist. Opposite party No.3 informed him and his family members that the complainant was suffering from end stage renal disease and required dialysis. He was discharged from the hospital on 19.12.2013. The complainant was allegedly given iron injection during his stay in the hospital though, such injection, according to the complainant is contra indicated in the case of a person suffering from a kidney disease. This is also the case of the complainant that he was prescribed iron injection on 18.3.2014 and 26.6.2014 namely Encicarb, without checking his ferritin level.

2. Another grievance of the complainant is that the medicine Metformin was advised to him, which was contra indicated in his case and his cardiovascular examination was not done in Sahara Hospital.

3. Yet another grievance of the complainant is that a medicine namely Liofen was prescribed to him which was contra indicated in his case.

4. Alleging negligence on the part of the opposite parties in his treatment, the complainant approached this Commission by way of this consumer complaint, seeking compensation for the damages to the extent of Rs.24,81,28,253/-, along with compensation for mental agony etc., quantified at Rs.4,80,00,000/-. He also sought a sum of Rs.3.8 crores for his future medical expenses.

5. The complaint has been resisted by the opposite parties. It is stated in the written version filed by the opposite parties that the complainant was a chronic alcoholic with a long standing history of Diabetes Mellitus. He was also found to have kidney disease with Urosepsis and chronic liver disease. It is also stated that 40% of the patient with type-I or type –II diabetes mellitus develops nephropathy, which is a common cause of chronic renal failure. It is admitted that the complainant was admitted in Sahara Hospital Lucknow on 24.9.2012 and was discharged from there on 25.9.2012. The discharge, according to the opposite parties was done at the request of his relatives. It is also alleged that at the time of discharge of the complainant on 25.9.2012, it was thought that the impairment of his kidney function could be due to dehydration and should be managed conservatively. It is admitted that the complainant was seen by Dr. Muffazal Ahmed and later by Dr. Ankur Gupta, who is a Gastroenterologist when he was admitted in the hospital on 09.12.2013. It is stated in the written version that the complete iron profile of the complainant was done on 10.12.2013 and he was treated with injection ‘Cresp’ and oral iron but he continued to remain anaemic, despite aggressive erythropoietin and oral iron. No intravenous iron was given to him during hospitalization during December, 2013. It is further stated that when he visited the OPD on 18.3.2014, he was advised to take injection Encicarb to be infused in two hours daily for two days after a detailed discussion on pros and cons of the therapy. It is further stated that when the comp