STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN Date of Admission : 22.07.2014 Date of Final Hearing : 30.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 20.11.2025 SC/5/CC/12/2014 Sh. Sandeep Gupta S/o Sh. M.C. Gupta R/o Hari Dham Colony, Vir Bhadra, Rishikesh, District Dehradun (Through: Sh. Avnit Rastogi, Advocate)

…..Complainant VERSUS

1. Max Super Speciality Hospital Malsi Estate, Mussoorie Diversion Road, Dehradun

2. Dr. A.K. Singh

3. Dr. Preeti Sharma 4. Dr. Punish Sadana

5. Dr. Amit Rana

2 to 5 All C/o Max Super Speciality Hospital, Malsi Estate, Mussoorie Diversion Road, Dehradun (Through: Sh. S.K. Agarwal, Advocate)

…..Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 5

6. Sh. Mahesh Chand Gupta S/o Sh. Chandra Prakash Gupta

7. Sh. Sanjay Agarwal S/o Sh. Mahesh Chand Gupta 8. Sh. Gaurav Agarwal S/o Sh. Mahesh Chand Gupta

9. Smt. Sushma Gupta W/o Sh. Deepak Gupta, D/o Sh. Mahesh Chand Gupta

10. Smt. Vandana Gupta W/o Sh. Ashish Gupta, D/o Sh. Mahesh Chand Gupta All R/o Hari Dham Colony, Vir Bhadra, Rishikesh, District Dehradun (Through: Sh. Kawaljeet Singh, Advocate)

…..Proforma Opposite Party Nos. 6 to 10 Coram:

Ms. Kumkum Rani, President Mr. C.M. Singh, Member

ORDER

(Per: Mr. C.M. Singh, Member):

This complaint under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed on behalf of the complainant. Brief facts of the case are as such that the complainant states that his mother late Smt. Shakuntala Devi was experiencing pain on the left side of her face and visited the opposite party No. 1 – Max Super Speciality Hospital, Dehradun (in short “Hospital”) for consultation on dated 01.04.2014. Upon examination and review of her previous medical records, the doctor at opposite party No. 1 – Hospital advised that she required surgery and also prescribed certain medications. The complainant decided to obtain second opinion and consulted Dr. A.K. Singh – opposite party No. 2, Director, Max Institute of Neurosciences – MIND, Dehradun of the Hospital on dated 10.04.2014. After reviewing the medical reports, the opposite party No. 2 advised that a MRI and certain other medical tests be conducted. The MRI was done on dated 10.04.2014 and other tests were conducted on dated 11.04.2014. Upon perusal of the reports, the opposite party No. 2 informed the complainant that the surgery of his mother would be performed on dated

14.04.2014 and instructed the Cardiac clearance tests to be carried out prior to the surgery. The complainant was advised to take his mother to Dr. Preeti Sharma – opposite party No. 3, Senior Cardiologist of the Hospital. The opposite party No. 3 alongwith Dr. Punish Sadana – opposite party No. 4 also a Senior Cardiologists MD (Med.) DM examined the complainant’s mother, reviewed her medical reports and advised for a Dobutamine Stress Echo (DSE) Test. The said DSE test was scheduled to be conducted by Dr. Amit Rana – opposite party No. 5 of Hospital. The opposite party No. 5 performed the said DSE test on dated 12.04.2014. During the course of the said test, after administration of the peak doses, the complainant’s mother suffered a cardiac arrest and became unresponsive, hypotensive and was immediately shifted to ICU. As a result of such incident, the complainant’s mother remained in a vegetative and unconscious state from 12.04.2014 onwards. The complainant alleged that the opposite party No. 5 failed to take necessary precautions during the procedure, as he neither explained the nature and risk before nor properly monitored the administration of the Dobutamine injection and rate of its infusion, as required under standard medical procedural. The conduct of opposite party No. 5, therefore, fell below the standard of a reasonable competent medical practitioner. The complainant further alleged that despite a super specialty hospital, the opposite party No. 1 lacked essential and adequate equipment to effectively handle the emergency situation. Further, the complainant stated that at the time of admission, he was informed total cost of trea