Delhi

North East

cc/323/2013

Sh. Suraj Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Medical Officer - Opp.Party(s)

02 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 323/13

 

 

In the matter of:

 

 

	Sh. Suraj Gupta S/o Lt. Sh. Mohan Lal Gupta R/o B338 West Karawal Nagar North East Delhi-54	Complainant
	Versus
1.         2.     3.	Chief Medical Officer Indira Gandhi Employees State Insurance Hospital, Jhilmil Colony, Delhi     Dr. Vikash Tandon IGESI Hospital Jhilmil Delhi   Dr. Tarun Kumar Verma Insurance Medical Officer, Department of Orthopedics, IGESI Hospital, Jhilmil Delhi	Opposite Party No.1     Opposite Party No.2           Opposite Party No.3

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:        JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                           DATE OF ORDER:

21.10.13 06.03.23 02.05.23

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

Adarsh Nain, Member

 

ORDER

 Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

 

 

 

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the wife of the Complainant got treatment in Opposite Party No.1 hospital. She was treated there by the doctors i.e. Opposite Party No. 2 and Opposite Party No.3. She was diagnosed with NDF anemia by Opposite Party No.2. The wife of the Complainant was admitted in Opposite Party hospital on 07.06.11 in emergency ward. It is stated by Complainant that his deceased wife was not given proper treatment due to which she suffered more sickness and the concerned doctor demanded unit of O blood group which the Complainant arranged. The Complainant stated that concerned doctor was negligent in treatment of Complainant’s wife due to which more infection occurred in the inner side of abdomen and other parts of the body of his wife.  Later on, due to the infection of the atrundum medicines and injection a serious condition had been occurred which resulted in partial paralysis disease later than the Complainant’s wife was referred to the orthopaedic department where she was treated under the treatment of Dr. Tarun Kumar Verma as per medical slips of the year of 2011. The Complainant stated that due to negligence in treatment his wife namely Sadhna Gupta expired on 06.03.12. The Opposite Parties gave false assurance to Complainant to compensate for his wife’s death and on 02.09.13 Opposite Parties denied to pay any compensation to Complainant. Hence, this shows deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties. Complainant has prayed for Rs. 4 lakhs for negligence on the part of Opposite Parties which cause the death of his wife.  

Case of the Opposite Parties

2. The Opposite Parties contested the case and filed common written statement. It is stated by Opposite Parties that the allegations made by the Complainant are false. The wife of the Complainant was attended in the casualty on 22.01.11 by Opposite Party No.3. She had come there with the complaint of pain in the right lower limb with history of fall one year ago. The wife of the Complainant did not disclose any history of diabetes, hypertension and fever. The Complainant’s wife was given first aid and she was kept in the observation in the Casualty for orthopaedic specialist opinion. On 24.01.11 she was admitted in Orthopaedic Department and was regularly treated by Opposite Party No.2 and Opposite Party No.3. It is also revealed by her that she was earlier treated at GTB Hospital for bad sores. From 25.01.11 to 18.02.11 the patient was regularly attended by the doctors. She was conscious oriented with stable vitals. She was discharged on 18.02.11 and was readmitted on 19.04.11. As per the standard protocol all investigations were done and she was treated in the hospital. Patient was discharged satisfactorily on 20.07.11. Thereafter patient was fallowed up in the ortho OPD till Nov-Dec 2011. Thereafter patient never flowed up in the ortho OPD. Thereafter patient came to Eye OPD on 08.12.11 thereafter on 25.02.12 she came with the complaint of fever. She was referred to Eye, ENT and medicine department. The investigation revealed septicemia at the time of admission. She was also admitted in the chest ward. On 03.03.12 she was immediately managed with the plan for further investigation. On 04.03.12 she became disoriented. On 05.03.12 she developed severe breathing problem and she was attended immediately then she was shifted to ICU. On 06.03.12 at 4:30 am she had a cardiac arrest. Despite best efforts she could not be revived. The Opposite Parties have denied the allegations of the Complainant and has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.    

Evidence of the Complainant

3. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Opposite Parties

4. In order to prove its case Opposite Parties has filed affidavit of Dr. Suman Seth, Medical Superintendent of the ESIC, wherein the averments made in the written statement of Opposite Parties have been supported.

Arguments & Conclusion

5. We have heard the Complainant and Ld. Counsel for Opposite Parties. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the parties. The case of the Complainant is that his wife was not treated properly at the hospital of Opposite Party No.1. It is his case that his wife died due to the negligence of doctors i.e. Opposite Party No. 2 and Opposite Party No. 3. On the other hand, the case of the Opposite Parties is that the wife of the Complainant was treated properly and there is no negligence on the part of the hospital and the treating doctors. Vide order dated 08.12.15 the case was sent along with the medical record for expert opinion.  
6. An order 18.07.17 passed by Delhi Medial Council was received. As per the said order, no case of medial negligence is made out. The relevant part of the order is reproduced under:-

“In view of the above, it is the opinion of the Executive committee that death of the patient was not directly related to the orthopaedic treatment (which was administered as per accepted professional practice) received by her at IGESI Hospital but due to other co-morbid conditions. In the light of the observations made herein-above, it is, therefore, the decision of the Executive committee that prima-facie no case of medical negligence is made out on the part of doctors of IGESI Hospital, in the treatment administered to the Complainant’s wife Smt. Sadhna Gupta, resulting in her death on 06.03.12 at IGESI Hospital.”

7. Therefore as per the expert opinion, no case of medical negligence made out. Even the Complainant has not led any cogent evidence to prove the case of medical negligence. Therefore, the complaint is without any merit and the same is dismissed.  
8. Order announced on 02.05.23.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Adarsh Nain) Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President