IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

Date of Decision: 24.10.2019

Complaint Case No.660/2013

Shri Inderjeet Singh,

S/o Late Shri Hari Singh,

R/o B-35, New Moti Nagar,

New Delhi – 110015.                                                  …. Complainant

Versus

1. Acharya Bhikshu Government Hospital,

Government of NCT of Delhi,

Moti Nagar, New Delhi -110015.

2. Mr. N.R. Aggarwal,

Medical Superintendent,

Acharya Bhikshu Government Hospital,

Government of NCT of Delhi,

Moti Nagar, New Delhi -110015.

3. Dr. Sushma,

SPL Gynecologist,

Acharya Bhikshu Government Hospital,

Government of NCT of Delhi,

Moti Nagar, New Delhi -110015.

4. Concerned Medical Staff and Hospital Authorities of

Acharya Bhikshu Government Hospital,

Government of NCT of Delhi,

Moti Nagar, New Delhi -110015.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM

Salma Noor, Presiding Member

1.Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

Salma Noor, Presiding Member

1. Complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite party (hereinafter referred as OP) under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short ‘the Act’) alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service against the OP.
2. Succinctly put, the case set up by the complainant is that while on the family way his wife, deceased Surinder Kaur, was under the medical supervision of the doctors of OP Archarya Bhikshu Government Hospital (hereinafter referred to as the Hospital) since 19.05.2011 and was undergoing regular medical checkups. She was also admitted in the hospital for treatment of high blood pressure in the first week of November. Later, she was discharged and was under medication for the same till she was admitted for delivery of her unborn child.
3. It is alleged that on 18.11.2011 she was admitted in the hospital for delivery as per advice of the doctor during the last medical checkup. It is alleged that till the next day afternoon, no information about her conditions was given to the complainant. It was alleged when mother of complainant went inside to get the information about the condition of the patient, she was asked to wait outside as certain injections and medicines were to be administered for inducing labour pains. It is alleged that at about 6.40 PM, complainant was informed about the delivery of a baby girl and was handed over a registration form for registration of the baby in nursery.
4. It is alleged that in the morning of 19.11.2011 complainant was told by the staff of OP to go to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital (DDUH) to give 01 unit of blood, which was complied with by the complainant. It is alleged that before leaving for DDUH, complainant was hurriedly made to sign some blank papers at places which were encircled and were later on filled by the hospital staff. Complainant has not even put the date and time on the same. It is alleged that on enquiry complainant was told that these were routine matters. Complainant was not explained about any specific reason for taking the signatures. It is alleged that as complainant was in a hurry he did not probe and decided to leave for DDUH to procure blood as demanded by OP. It is alleged that after the complainant left for DDUH, his mother was further made to sign blank papers on the pretext that it was urgently required for treatment of the patient. It is alleged that his mother also did not put the time and date on the said papers. It is alleged that after the complainant left DDUH at about 7.45 PM on 19.11.2011, he received a call from the staff of OP asking him to arrange 04 units of additional blood as the patient was bleeding profusely as the uterus was not retracting. The complainant hurriedly arranged the same and reached the hospital where he was informed about deteriorating condition of his wife. It is alleged that the complainant was informed that her uterus needed to be removed immediately for which she had to be take