SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 26005

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Selvi G. Anukasree gowda – Appellant
Versus
Mathrushree multi Specialty hospital & O – Respondent
SC/29/CC/64/2011



Petitioner Advocates:Ravi & Ravi ,Respondent Advocate: Suresh, Satish

Date of Filing :06.04.2011 Date of Disposal :01.04.2022 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

DATED THIS THE 01st DAY OF APRIL-2022 PRESENT HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT Mr. K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER MrsM.DIVYASHREE : LADY MEMBER CC-NO.64/2011

1. Selvi.G.Anukasree Gowda, Since deceased represented By her LRs.

1a) Sri. H.Gangaraju, S/o late Huchaiah, Aged about 47 years, 1b) Smt. Rukmini.H.M, W/o Sri.H.Gangaraju, Aged about 42 Years, Both R/at Ramadevanahalli, Kannamangala Post, Doddaballapur Taluk, Madhura Hobli, Bangalore Rural District.

..Complainant (By Sri/Smt.M.C.Ravi Kumar, Advocate)

-Versus-

1. Mathrushree Multi-Specia lity Hospital, No.6930, S.No.198, NH-4, Sondekoppa, Bye-Pass, Nelamangala, Rep/by Dr.Mahesh Gandhi.

2. Dr. Mahesh Gandhi, S/o K.C.Siddramegowda, Aged about 50 years, Mathrushree Multi Specialty Hospital, No.6930, S.No.198, NH-4, Sondekoppa, Bye-Pass, Nelamangala.

3. H.J.Bhanumathi, W/o Dr.Mahesh Gandhi, Aged about 40 Years, Mathrushree Multi Specialty Hospital, No.6930, S.No.198, NH-4, Sondekoppa, Bye-Pass, Nelamangala.

4. Dr.Vijay Kumar, Fathers name not known, Hindu, Major, Mathrushree Multi Specialty Hospital, No.6930, S.No.198, NH-4, Sondekoppa, Bye-Pass, Nelamangala.

5. Sri. Vasantha, Administrator, Aged about 35 Years, R/at No.19, Mathru Nilaya, 2nd floor, 2nd Cross, Opposite Old Check Post, Near R.R.Hospital, T.Dharashalli, Bangalore-560 057.

6. National Ins. Co. Ltd., Branch Office No.2, No.20/2, 1st floor, Opposite Indian Overseas Bank, 1st Main, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru-560 009, Bengaluru.

..Opposite Parties (OP-1 to 4 By Sri/Smt.T.Mohan, OP5 by S.P.Sathisha and OP6 by Sri/Smt. Bengaluru C.Seetharama Rao, Advocates) O R D E R Mr. K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. This is a complaint filed u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, to hold OPs jointly and severally liable for deficiency of service committed by them, in initially treating the deceased first complainant, resulting in making her virtually dead and clinically alive and do pay Rs.49,00,000/- and grant such other reliefs as Commission deems fit in the circumstances of the case.

2. The brief facts of the case of complainant are stated below:

Initially the complaint is filed by a minor Girl Child represented by her Father on 06.04.2011 and as the said child during pendency of the complaint died on 17.10.2016, as such her parents are brought on record as her LRs 1-a and 1-b, since the right to survives.

3. Deceased first complainant is the Daughter of 1a and 1b and she was hale and healthy, was studying in second class. She was born on 20.05.2003 and on 26.08.2010 around 2.30 pm had symptoms of vomiting and head ache, for which her Mother took the said child to OP-1-hospital for consultancy and treatment, if needed. OP-1-hospital proclaims to be a multi- speciality hospital is run by O.P.No.2 and 3 of whom O.P.No.2 is the main Doctor treating the patients. On the eventful day viz., on 26.08.2010 as O.P.No.2 and 3 were absent and the in-charge person proclaimed to be the Doctor, the fourth O.P Dr.VijayKumar, was present to whom told about symptoms of child and he without making any further diagnosis and even without obtaining history of the patient, administered two injections, without informing her Mother as to what the injections were and the purpose and object with which that it is intended to be administered. O.P.No.4 even did not make any enquiry into the history of the patient, the symptoms of vomiting and head ache. He made no enquiry as to what food the child had in the morning or on the previous night, no enquiry was made with her Mother or with the patient child, administered two injections. He did not call her Mother to bring any disposable syringe or to procure any medicine from medical shop by giving any written prescription. No sooner the injections were administered, the child slipped into coma and lost her consciousness, and as a result O.P.No.4 becam

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top