IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Course of Action – Negligence cannot be attributed to a doctor so long as he is performing his duties to the best of his ability and with due care and caution. Merely because the doctor chooses one course of action in preference to the other one available, he would not be liable if the course of action chosen by him was acceptable to the medical profession.
(2) Res Ipsa Loquitor – The negligence alleged should be so glaring, in which event the principle of res ipsa loquitur could be made applicable and not based on perception.

ORDER

Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member.—A doctor couple, Dr. Samir Jain and Dr. Pooja Jain, dentist by profession were practicing at Gaya. On 16.04.2012 Dr. Pooja (since deceased herein referred to as “the patient”) had symptoms of fever, sore throat and myalgia. She consumed medicines Azithromycin and Paracetamol for 3 days and started attending her dental clinic from 21.04.2012. On 24.04.2012 around at 1.00 p.m., she felt stress, state of confusion and irritable mind, therefore she came back to home. She consulted Dr. A. N. Rai, a renowned physician, who examined her but was unable to find the cause. He advised to take her to advance medical centre for further management. Accordingly, in the morning on 25.04.2012, they travelled by road from Gaya to Patna, and then flew to Delhi. She was accompanied by her husband and father in law – Dr. Vijay Jain. During their travel from Gaya to Patna, once she got generalized convulsions (seizures) which lasted for one minute and similar two convulsions occurred in the flight, which lasted for 30 to 60 seconds. According to the Complainant, the convulsions were organic / psychogenic in nature without any mouth frothing, and tongue bite or injury. On landing at Delhi airport, the patient was directly taken to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital (SGRH) by an ambulance and was admitted in Emergency ward at 11.15 AM. After preliminary assessment and treatment, she was intubated and shifted to I.C.U. and put on ventilatory support. The treatment was started with anti-epileptic, anti-malarial, antibiotics and antiviral drug (Acyclovir). The M.R.I. and other blood reports revealed normal findings. She was ex-tubated after two hours.

2. On the same day evening, the parents of Dr. Pooja and their close family friend Dr. S.P. Kalantri with Dr. Jyoti Sehgal (OP-4) reached SGRH. Dr. Jyoti was a former PG student of Dr. Kalantri and was presently working as an Associate Consultant in the Deptt. of Neuroscience in The Medicity at Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Medanta’-OP-1). The Complainant alleged that for the better care and treatment, the OP-4 advised the family members to shift the patient at Medanta. Therefore, under impression that the presence of OP-4 would be more helpful, the patient was shifted to Medanta by ambulance on 26.04.2012. The patient was admitted in the Neuro I.C.U. headed by Dr. Sumit Singh (OP-3) with Dr. Jyoti Sehgal (OP-4). It was alleged that the condition of patient was stable and all the blood investigations, E.E.G., M.R.I.(twice) and CSF study (Lumbar Puncture) were normal, except slightly low Serum Calcium level. In spite of all normal reports, unnecessarily the patient was administered with heavy doses of higher antibiotics, antiviral drugs and steroids. It was further alleged that both the consultants (OP-3 & 4) had never arrived for final diagnosis, but treated the patient on experimental basis unethically to generate more revenue. The Complainant and his father requested the doctors to take a second opinion or refer the patient to AIIMS, Delhi or PGI Chandigarh or CMC Vellore but they evaded it. Therefore, the complainant himself tried to get the patient admitted in AIIMS, Delhi, but his efforts failed and as no option left, the patient was again shifted to SGRH on 08.05.2012 at about 1.00 pm. After 39 days, during the treatment, she expired on 15.06.2012. It was alleged that the Complainant sold jewelry of his wife to pay hefty bills of Medanta and SGRH. After the patient’s death, the Complainant and his father, Dr. Vijay Jain have consulted and discussed with many senior doctors, also got information from the advanced medical literatures that the treatment given at Medanta was not correct, wherein many drugs were unjustified and unethical including IVIG (Rs. 56,000/- per day).

3. Being aggrieved by the untimely death of his wife, Dr. Samir Jain filed the Consumer Complainant under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as “th