He who asserts medical negligence must prove it with appropriate evidence and cannot rely solely on allegations.

1. The instant Appeal was filed against the Order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’) in OP No. 31 of 2004, whereby the Complaint was dismissed on the ground that the Complainant failed to prove medical negligence or deficiency in service against the Opposite Party.

2. Brief facts are that the Complainant, Ms. Sugachitra (hereinafter referred to as the ‘patient’) during 18.9.2002 to 21.9.2002 took treatment from Dr. R. S. Murlidharan, the Opposite Party, at K.S. Hospital, Chennai for Pyrexia of unknown Origin (PUO)”. It was alleged that due to administration of Sulfa drugs, the patient suffered severe allergic reaction and developed oral ulcers, swelling of lips with skin and eye complication. Thereafter, from 23.9.2002 to 21.10.2002, she took further treatment at the Apollo Hospital for the alleged allergic complications. Thereafter, for her eye complications, she consulted at Sankara Netralaya and few eye specialists at Chennai. Being aggrieved due to alleged negligent treatment of the Opposite Party caused such complications and incurable sufferings; she filed the Consumer Complaint before the State Commission, Chennai.

3. The Opposite Party, Dr. K. S. Murlidharan, filed the written version and submitted that he was a consultant at K. S. Hospital and he treated the patient between 18.9.2002 to 21.9.2002. He denied any negligence during treatment. He further submitted that prior to the admission to K.S. Hospital, the patient was treated by her family doctor for her complaints of fever, dryness and ulcers in mouth. He suspected it as PUO with Herpes viral disease; and kept her under observation at K.S. Hospital. She was treated with antibiotics and other medicines, but not administered any Sulfa drugs. The injection of 200 mg was not a Sulfa drug. She was discharged at her request on 21.9.2002 and called for follow up on 24.9.2002. However, the patient approached the Apollo Hospital and he was not aware of her further treatment. He further submitted that on 15.9.2003 after almost one year, the Complainant issued a legal notice, stating that due to negligence of the Opposite Party, she suffered Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN), though, no way the Opposite Party was responsible for the alleged medical negligence.

4. The State Commission, considering the averments of the Parties and the material on record, dismissed the Complaint. Being aggrieved, the Complainant filed the instant Appeal.

5. We have heard the learned Counsel for both sides. Perused the entire material on record, the medical prescriptions and treatment records of various hospitals inter alia, wherefrom the patient took the treatment.

6. There was a delay of 59 days in filing the instant Appeal. It is condoned for the reasons stated in the application for Condonation of Delay.

7. On merit, it is apparent from the Medical Record of K.S. Hospital that on 18.9.2002, the patient was admitted in K.S. Hospital for the complaint of fever, chills and rigor and burning micturition under care of the Opposite Party till 21.9.2002. The Complainant initially took treatment from family doctor before 18.9.2002 for the same complaints. The Ex - A1 Discharge Summary of K.S. Hospital revealed the diagnosis as “Pyrexia of unknown Origin (PUO)”. The treatment was started with Injection Zofer 4 mg tds. Inj. Of 200 mg IV bd, Inj. Emol 2 mg od, T. Dolo 650 mg tds, T. Happi 20 mg bd, Syp. Sucrafil - O - gel tds; Sup Alerid 5 ml tds, Herperax ointment and she was called for review on 24.9.2002. In spite of advice for review, she got admitted at Apollo Hospital 23.9.2002. There is nothing on record as to which medicine the patient too