Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
R.K. Agrawal, President, Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Member and Binoy Kumar, Member
Appeared at the time of arguments through video conferencing Rachna Khosla and Ors. —Appellants
versus
Dayanand Medical College & Hospital and Ors. —Respondents
First Appeal No.940 of 2015
(Against the Order dated 01/07/2015 in Complaint No.101/2014 of the State Commission Punjab)
Decided on 8.2.2022
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. Sanjoy Kumar Ghosh, Amicus Curiae and Ms. Rupali S. Ghosh, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1 to 3:Mr. Animesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent No.4:Mr. Maibam N. Singh, Advocate
Headnote:
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – S.19 [Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – S.51] – Services – Medical Negligence – Appeal against order of State Commission whereby Complaint was dismissed – diagnosis of schizophrenia and Obstructive Sleep Apnea – Whether negligence or deficiency in service can be fastened on part of the Opposite Parties on the premise that a patient suffered from the overdose of medicines – In the instant case, treatment given to the patient was as per prescribed standards – As per ICD-10 criteria, he was diagnosed as “Schizophrenic-Paranoid type with type II DM with severe family, personal, social and occupational dysfunction. Patient ran away from PGI during treatment – The PGI experts opined that there was no negligence and the doses of anti-psychotic and sedative drugs were within normal range, it was not an overdose – Thus Commission does not find any negligence or deficiency in service on part of the Opposite Parties. There was no deviation from the standard of practice. The doctors treated the patient as per the clinical signs of the psychiatric disease. The prescribed dose of medicines was well within the acceptable range – Therefore, patient did not suffer from the overdose of such medicine. However, during treatment, the patient suffered cardiac arrest, which caused his death – First Appeal is dismissed. [Paras 8 to 11].
Result: Appeal dismissed.
ORDER
Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Member.—The instant Appeal has been filed by the Appellants — Complainants against the Order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in Consumer Complaint No. 101/2014, wherein the Complaint was dismissed.
2. Briefly stated facts are that a Civil Contractor, Mr. Sanchit Khosla (since deceased, hereinafter referred to as the “Patient”) was a healthy person except having occasional minor psychiatric problems for 7 to 8 years. On 24.01.2011, he consulted one senior psychiatrist, Dr. Rupesh Chaudhari, (hereinafter referred to as the “Opposite Party No. 2”) at Dayanand Medical College & Hospital, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as “DMC/Opposite Party No. 1”) for routine check-up. After examination, he advised the patient for admission in the hospital, but the patient and his attendants were reluctant for hospitalisation. However, because of pressure and derogatory words used by the Opposite Party No. 2, the patient was admitted in the psychiatric ward at DMC on 01.02.2011. The routine blood tests and ECG were found to be normal. It was alleged that though the condition of the patient was normal, the Opposite Party No. 2 unnecessarily started giving him heavy doses of medicines, the patient remained drowsy throughout hospitalisation which subsequently led to the death of the patient.
3. The Opposite Parties filed their written version and denied any negligence during treatment of the patient.
4. The State Commission dismissed the Complaint. To challenge the dismissal, the Complainant filed the instant First Appeal.
5. We have heard the arguments from both the sides and perused the Medical Record inter alia two expert opinions. The case of the Complainant is that due to complications developed because of overdose of sedatives and anti-psychotic, the patient died. Whereas the case of the Opposite Parties is that during hospitalization, the patient was treated for the psychiatric problems as per reasonable care. The death was due to cardiac arrest but not due to complications of drugs or over dosage.
6. In the instant case, the State Commission took an opinion from the Medical Board constituted at PGI, Chandigarh. The Board consists of the Specialist doctors from Department of Psychiatry, Internal Medicine, Cardiology and Hospital Administration. The Board gave the opinion on following 3 specific points as under:-
1. Whether the protocol was observed by OPs in respect of dose given to the deceased while treating him as a patient of psychiatry.
2. If there was over dose whether the same resulted into complication resulting in the death of deceased.
3. Whether the requisite treatment was given to the patient after his condition became serious at 7 PM on 04.02.2010.
The board opined as :
“1. On the basis of the available record, it is evident that the patient (Late Shri Sanchit Khosia, 41 years old male) was suffering from a serious mental illness, most likely schizophrenia, for 11-12 years, and was admitted with frank psychotic symptoms, aggressive behviour and behavioral disinhibition. Sepcific psychotropic medicines given to the patient, which include antipsychotics and sedatives as part of the treatment package, are required for treatment of such patient as per present medical standards.
2. As per the available record, patient Late Shri Sanchit Khosia was suffering from multiple medical conditions such as uncontrolled Diabetes Mellitus, Obesity, and probable Obstructive Sleep Apnea, all of which are known medical risk factors for occurrence of adverse cardiac events. Use of antipsychotics and sedatives (which was a requisite treatment for his uncontrolled and severe psychiatric problems at the time of admission) can precipitate acute Cardio-Pulmonary events in such high-risk patients. The doses of the antipsychotics and sedatives, as recorded in the Treatment Charts provided to the Board for scrutiny, are within approve
