Back
Date of filing : 02.07.2009
IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.
Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH ... PRESIDENT
Thiru.R.VENKATESAPERUMAL … MEMBER
C.C. No.32 of 2009
Orders pronounced on: 26.10.2022
O.R.Mathivanan,
21, Nehru Street,
Olapalayam, Modakurichi,
Erode-638 104.
… Complainant
vs.
1.Dr.Dhanabagyam, M.D. DGO,
Sudha Hi-Tech IVF & Endoscopy Centre
(Sudha Women & Fertility Hospital),
181, Perundurai Road, Erode 638 011.
2. Dr.N.Padmanaban, M.D, DM,
KMCH Speciality Hospital,
15, Palaniappa Street,
Erode 638 009.
... Opp. Parties.
For Complainant
: M/s.V.Balaji
For OP No.1
: M/s.AAV Partners
For OP No.2
: M/s. Iyar & Thomas
This Complaint came up for final hearing on 13.07.2022
and, after hearing the arguments of the counsels and
perusing the materials on record and having stood over for
consideration till this day, this Commission passes the
following:-
O R D E R
R.Subbiah, J. – President.
The complainant herein seeks this Commission to
direct the Opposite Parties to pay to him-
i) a sum of Rs.55,20,000/- towards
the loss of income;
ii) Rs.10 Lakh as compensation for
mental agony;
iii)
Rs.3.5
Lakh
as
Medical
Expenses; and
iv) Rs.50,000/- towards costs of
the complaint.
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is as
follows:-
The complainant and his wife by name Sudha, after
their marriage on 04.12.1997, for about 11 years, had no
issues out of the wedlock. The 1st OP made wide publicity
about the latest technique in child birth called In-vitro
Fertilization & Embryo Transfer (in brief - IVF). The wife of
the complainant was very much impressed with the 1st OP's
advertisement and, on 27.05.2008, the couple met the 1st
OP for consultation. After various tests, the 1st OP
suggested the plan to do TESE ICSI, a medical technique to
attain pregnancy, and directed the couple to come for the
next visit on 17.06.2008, on which date, she performed
Ovum
Aspiration
under
General
Anesthesia
to
the
complainant's wife - Sudha. After the said procedure, the
1st OP informed that transfer of 5 embryos was done and
she fixed the ovum aspiration date as 02.07.2008,
fertilization date as 03.07.2008 and IVF-ER date as
04.07.2008.
While so, on 02.07.2008, that is, two days prior to
04.07.2008, the 1st OP performed IVF transfer, without even
obtaining the informed consent. Further, she obtained
signatures in a printed affidavit form on 28.06.2008 itself,
which is an utter violation of the medical norms and hence,
it is invalid in law. On 28.07.2008, the 1st OP told the
complainant that his wife had conceived and that the date of
delivery is 02.03.2009 since the last menstrual period was
on 14.06.2008. Thereafter, the complainant and his wife
visited the 1st OP on 5 different dates during August, 2008
and, at no point of time, she informed them that there were
four fetuses in the uterus of his wife, except stating that the
fetal growth was very good. For taking the First Trimester
Scan, the 1st OP referred the complainant's wife to Mediscan
on 04.09.2008. The scan report revealed that fetal reduction
was done at Mediscan from quadruplets to twins, of which,
one fetus/'C' was found with cervical length of 39 mm &
gestational age of 10 weeks & 6 days while the other
fetus/'D' was with cervical length of 42 mm & corresponding
gestational age of 11 weeks and their growth was
satisfactory. With the scan report, they met the 1st OP on
09.09.2008 without knowing the reduction of two fetuses
and she directed the complainant's wife to undergo a minor
procedure to stitch the uterus on 28.09.2008. Even at the
time of performing the said procedure, she did not inform
them about its necessity. Thereafter, periodical check-up
was done by the said OP on 30.10.2008, 02.12.2008 and
14.12.2008.
On 13.01.2009, after examination, the 1st OP stated
that there is no anomaly in the fetal
