ORDER

AVM J. Rajendra, AVSM, VSM (Retd.), Member—This Order shall decide both the appeals arising out from the impugned Judgment /Order dated 30.07.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in Complaint No. 157/2017, wherein the State Commission partly allowed the complaint.

2. For convenience, the parties are referred per the Complaint before the State Commission. Mr. Raghuveer Singh is referred as the Appellant/ Complainant in FA No. 1178/ 2019 and Narayana Hridayalaya Ltd. (Narayana Multispecialty Hospital) is referred as Opposite Party No. 1 (OP-1), Dr. Ankit Mathur is referred as OP-2 and Dr. Anshu Kabra (Cardiac Consultant) is referred as OP-3.

3. Brief facts of the case as per the Complainant are that he and his wife visited Soni Hospital for a routine check for her. As he had some dental issue, the Complaint consulted a dentist at the hospital. On inspection by the dentist, he was advised tooth extraction and scheduled the extraction for 23.03.2017 at the same Hospital.

4. On 23.03.2017 the Complainant reported to Soni Hospital for tooth extraction. However, during the procedure, he experienced excruciating pain, leading to his admission in the hospital. After examination, the doctors recommended an angiography due to the Complainant’s low blood pressure and seizures. Due to urgency, the Complainant’s family was contacted for consent. Angiography revealed 60%, 70%, and 100% blockages in his arteries and the doctors advised stent placement. Since he came in initially seeking treatment for tooth pain, he was unable to undergo the stent procedure immediately. He then consulted another doctor Dr. Vijay Pathak at Sawai Mansingh Hospital who recommended medication instead of immediate stent placement. He consulted OP-1 Hospital, a reputed facility specialised in heart-related issues. Upon medical examination at OP-1 Hospital on 02.04.2017, he was advised to undergo stent placement by OP-3, who assured him of the hospital’s expertise in the procedure. At 1200 Hrs on 03.04.2017, the Complainant was taken to the Operation Theatre (OT) by the OPs. After concluding the procedure, he regained consciousness at 4.00 PM and complained chest pain. This concern was communicated to OP-3 by his family members. In response, OP-3 reassured them that pain after stent placement was normal and it would subside and OP-3 left the place.

5. Prior to the procedure, the OPs informed the Complainant that the stent placement would be done through the veins in his hand. However, upon exiting the OT, he realized that it was done through the veins in the leg, which is considered an older and less preferred method. This raised concerns about quality of service. As his chest pain persisted and intensified further, his family members reported to Dr. Rahul, who examined him and summoned senior doctors for evaluation. Overhearing the doctors’ conversation, it became apparent that the Complainant sustained a rupture in his heart, resulting in bleeding and blood accumulation. As it was critical, he was taken back to the OT to examine the source of pain. An incision was made in his chest to remove accumulated blood due to bleeding. However, there was continuous bleeding and attempts to stop it were unsuccessful. They administered an injection for blood-thickening. After about 90 minutes, he was transferred to the ICU, and the family was informed that the operation was successful. However, at about 6.00 PM on the same day, the Complained informed the medical staff that he has no sensation in his right leg. They explained to him that it was due to placement of the stent and that sensation would return in a while. However, an hour later, at 7.00 PM, he again informed OP-3 that he is unable to feel his feet and requested for examination.

6. OP-3 examined him and identified blackening at the place where the stent was inserted. He was administered a potent medicine along with Metacy