Nitu Kumari VS Vijay Kumar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA, BHARATKUMAR PANDYA
Nitu Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Kumar – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Dr. Ram Kishore Singh, Advocate Cum C. No. 2
For the Opp. Parties:Mr. Praveen Kumar and Mr. Naman Mittal, Advocates

ORDER

Bharatkumar Pandya, Member.—The present complaint under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed against the opposite parties – doctors for medical negligence and deficiency in service during treatment of complainant no. 1 during her operation by OP-1 and subsequent reports Complainant No. 1 was working as block teacher before her treatment with the OPs. On 05.12.2013 for the first time complainant no. 1 went to Kumar Nursing Home of OP-1 with her husband for treatment of abdominal pain. Appendix was diagnosed by the doctor with assurance to cure it through medicines. Complainant no. 1 got relief for her abdominal pain for three months but when she again felt the same on 07.03.2014, she went to Dr. Vijay Kumar, OP-1 at Kumar Nursing Home for treatment. She was advised for surgery of appendix and was called for the same on 12.03.2014, on which date, without any pathological or radiological tests her surgery was performed within three hours of her admission in the Nursing Home. Surgery was performed by OP-1 doctor along with his OT Assistant but the cut out portion of the appendix was never shown to complainant no. 2. OP-1 doctor called complainant n