Negligence in medical treatment must be proven with concrete evidence, and mere adverse outcomes do not imply failure of care.

1. Being aggrieved by the order and judgment dated 25.7.2022 of District Commission, Surendranagar in Consumer Complaint No. 41 of 2021, the appellant herein prefers this appeal to submit that the impugned order is illegal, unjust, arbitrary and deserves to be set aside and complaint is require to be dismissed.

2. For the convenience, parties are addressed to its original nomenclature.

3. (a). It was the case of complainant before District Commission that on 16th September, 2019; complainant had chest pain and nervousness for which she had consulted local doctor. When she found that her condition did not improved, then consulted opponent on 21st September, 2019 where she was advised to undergo angiography and other diagnostic tests to ascertain line of treatment. On the same day she had undergone angiography through which it was revealed that bypass surgery would be better option. It is further averred that complainant and relatives had no fund in hand therefore they show A card of Government Scheme known as Amrut Vatsalya Card. To get the benefit under the said scheme, necessary formalities required to be completed and therefore complainant and relatives were asked to submit necessary details in the forms. She was put under care of Dr. Abhishek Parmar at opponent No. 1 - hospital.
(b) It is further stated that after receiving confirmation from Government for the approval, she was operated on 24.9.2019. She was having pain during hospitalisation and therefore she had requested for two more days stay at hospital but the opponent refused saying maximum hospital stay permitted under the Scheme is 6 days. She was discharged on 30.9.2019. She alleged that while giving discharge, she was not given CD of angiography. When condition did not improved even after regular medicine prescribed by the doctor, telephonic communication was done with Dr. Parmar. The doctor insisted for regular medicine and assured that after some time everything will be ok. It is alleged that when pain did not subside even after three months treatment, she was taken to Ahmedabad and after examination, Dr Parmar advised for rehospitalisation. At this time, the opponent hospital asked for deposit of Rs.25,000. Dr. Parmar gave certain medicines and on 26.12.2019 Rs.25,000 was deposited. Thereafter without assigning any reason, discharge was given on 27.12.2019 and complainant was asked to pay additional Rs.6,750.
(c) When she did not get relief from pain, consulted Shalby hospital for second opinion. The attendant at Shalby informed that there is something wrong in surgery and advised for re - angiography. It is alleged that the said report of angiography revealed that earlier surgery was totally failed. When Dr. Parmar was consulted again, he asked relatives that you have not spend money from your own pocket and if you use Government facility minor problems would remains. The complainant stated to have spent Rs.49,014 at Shalby Hospital and thereafter consulted at EPIC Hospital, Ahmedabad. Dr. Anil Jain performed another surgery and complainant had to incur expenses around Rs.3,70,000. According to complainant, because of carelessness on the part of the doctor at opponent hospital, the complainant subjected to another surgery and had to incur expenses. And therefore complaint was filed.

4. On issuance of notice, the opponent appeared through Advocate and filed detail reply contending therein that there was no negligence on its part and also no case of deficiency in service. It is categorically submitted that complainant has filed this complaint with an intention to extort money. The opponent has also raised many preliminary objections w