BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

 05^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015

O R D E R

SRI. P.V SINGRI, PRESIDENT

The complainant has filed this complaint U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Party (herein after referred as OP) with a prayer to direct the OP to pay him Rs.1,00,000/- towards cost incurred by him for the treatment of his father and for mental agony undergone by him and for the members of his family.

 2. The brief averments made in the complaint are as under:

That on 09.07.2013 the complainant brought his ailing father Sri.R.Krishnaji Rao, aged 89 years to Chinmaya Mission hospital through 108 Ambulance at 3.00 A.M as he had suffered paralytic stroke and had become very tired.  Dr.Karthik, was on night duty in the casualty and he did not allow the complainant to admit his father in the said hospital on the pretext that no room is available in ICU.  Despite repeated requests by the complainant as well as the Inspector of Police, Indiranagar Police Station the said Dr.Karthik was very adamant and did not admit the father of the complainant to the said hospital on the ground that no room was available in the ICU.  That the said Dr.Karthik then referred the patient to Axon hospital, Indiranagar.  As per the specific direction of Dr.Karthik, the complainant took his father in the same 108 Ambulance to Axon hospital situated at 6^th Main, HAL II Stage, Indiranagar and admitted his father to the hospital.  The said Axon hospital was not having proper facilities nor was specialists available.  Even the ICU ceiling was leaking (due to rain) and their Ambulance was not in working condition.  Axon hospital were only interested in taking money from the complainant with repeated follow up and threats of immediate discharge.  Doctors in the said hospital did not give proper care and treatment and complainant was made to spent more than Rs.1,00,000/- for the treatment in the ICU up to 12.07.2013.  The said hospital discharged the father of the complainant without proper treatment and he was sent with oral pipe in the mouth for feeding liquid food and urinary pipe was also left.  That on 10.08.2013 the father of the complainant died.

It was only because of collusion and negligence of Dr.Karthik, the father of the complainant died.  The senior doctors at the Chinmaya Mission Hospital sympathized with complainant and told him that Dr.Karthik should not have referred to such a small hospital and could have referred to major hospital like Manipal hospital or St. John’s hospital.  The father of the complainant could have lived and survived had he been referred to a better hospital.  That due to the negligence of Dr.Karthik, the complainant lost his father and was also made to spend huge money.

For the aforesaid reasons, the complainant prays for ordering the OP to pay him Rs.1,00,000/- towards the cost incurred by him for the treatment of his father and also for mental agony suffered by him and members of his family.

3. In response to the notice issued, OP appeared through their advocate and filed their version contending in brief as under:

The complainant has filed a false, frivolous and vexatious complaint against the OP.  It is admitted that complainant on 09.07.2013 at about 3.00 A.M brought his father R.Krishna Rao to the hospital and the said R.Krishna Rao had suffered paralytic stroke and had become very tired.  Dr.Karthik, Casualty Medical Officer in the hospital examined the patient and after examination, taking into account of the old age of the patient, past medical history of paralytic stroke and general debility of patient came to the conclusion that the patient need to be monitored in the ICU.  As there was no ICU bed vacant in the Chinmaya Mission hospital on that day Dr.Karthik advised the complainant to take the patent to any other higher centres such as Manipal Hospital, St. John’s Hospital and Axon hospital where the ICU and ventilator facilities are available for treatment.  That the complainant did not agree with the Dr.Karthik and started arguing with him despite Dr.Karthik convincing the complainant about the non-availability of bed in ICU for admission of his father.

The complainant also spoke to the Inspector of Police, Indiranagar and the said Inspector of Police also spoke to Dr.Karthik.  Dr.Karthik explained the Inspector that he cannot admit the patient because of non-availability of ICU bed.  Thereafter, the complainant took his father to another hospital.  Dr.Karthik never advised the complainant to take his father only to Axon Hospital.  The doctor has suggested nearby hospitals such as Manipal, St. Johns and Axon.  It is the decision of the complainant to go to Axon hospital because of his convenience and nearness to his residence.  The discharge summary issued by Axon hospital produced by the complainant discloses that the patient has been treated by specialist consultants.  The discharge summary indicates that only after about a month from discharge the father of the complainant died.  If the complainant noticed that the Axon hospital was not having proper facility and specialists to treat his father, he should have shifted his father any other hospital of his choice.  If Axon hospital did not give proper care and on that account if his father was died as contended by the complainant, it is mischievous on the part of the complainant to claim compensation from this OP as his father was never treated in the OP hospital and no medical expenses were incurred by the complainant in the OP hospital.  The OP hospital cannot offer any opinion as to the treatment given by some other hospital.

The allegations of collusion or negligence made against Dr.Karthik are all false.  The OP hospital is not at all responsible for the death of the complainant’s father.  The OP hospital has suitably replied to the letter dated 03.09.2014 written by the complainant.  The OP hospital is not at all responsible to pay any compensation to the complainant and the complainant has filed a false, frivolous complaint against the OP.

For the aforesaid reasons, the OP prays for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost.

4. On the rival contention of the parties to the proceedings, the points that arise for our determination in this case are as under:

        5. The complainant to substantiate the allegations made in the complaint filed his affidavit by way of evidence and also written arguments.  The OP in support of the contention raised in the version got filed affidavit of Dr.Karthik R and also submitted written arguments.

6. Perused the allegations made in the complaint, the sworn statement of complainant and the documents relied upon by him.  Also perused the averments made in the version, affidavit of Dr.Karthik and other materials placed on record including the written submissions made by both the parties.  Heard the oral arguments advanced by the complainant as well as learned advocate for OP.

7. Our answer to the above issues are as under:

REASONS

8.  It is not in dispute that on 09.07.2013 around 3.00 A.M the complainant took his father Sri.R.Krishna Rao, aged 89 years to Chinmaya Mission Hospital, who had suffered paralytic stroke and was too tired.  It is also not in dispute that one Dr.Karthik was the Casualty Medical Officer at OP hospital during the said time.  The said Dr.Karthik, as admitted by the complainant examined the said R.Krishna Rao and taking into consideration his age past medical history and that the conditions of the said Krishna Rao was critical and he need to be monitored by admitting to ICU in his sworn statement, the said Dr.Karthik stated that since no room/bed was available in the ICU of the OP hospital he advised the complainant to take his father to a better center like St. John’s hospital, Manipal Hospital and Axon hospital where the ICU facility and ventilator are available.  However, the complainant in his affidavit evidence reiterated the allegations made in the complaint and stated that Dr.Karthik advised him to take his father specifically to Axon hospital.  Dr.Karthik denies this allegation and states in his affidavit that he never specifically asked the complainant to go to Axon hospital but asked him to take to either Manipal hospital, St. John’s hospital or Axon hospital.

9. Except the sworn statement of the complainant there is no other credible material available on record to believe that Dr.Karthik advised the complainant to take his father only to Axon hospital.  Admittedly Dr.Karthik was either working at Axon hospital in the past or a visiting doctor to the said hospital.  Therefore, we have no reasons to believe that Dr.Karthik was in any way interested to see that the said patient is taken to Axon hospital only.  Dr.Karthik after examining the father of the complainant was of the opinion that the monitoring health of father of complainant is essential by admitting into ICU and since no bed in the ICU was available in the OP hospital, he advised to take the patient to some other hospital where the ICU facilities are available.  Except examining the patient, no treatment was given to the father of the complainant at OP hospital and the complainant has also not spent money at the OP hospital either for examination or for any other services.

10. The complainant alleges that because of the specific advice of Dr.Karthik, he took his father to Axon hospital where the ICU facilities were very poor and no specialized doctors were available to treat his father.  As already stated above, there is no credible evidence on record to believe that Dr.Karthik advised the complainant to take his father only to Axon hospital.  The copy of the discharge summary produced by the complainant indicates that the father of the complainant was treated by the specialist doctors at Axon hospital from 09.07.2013 to 12.07.2013.  Though the complainant alleges that the facilities at Axon hospital were very poor and the specialist doctors were not available for treatment, however there is no explanation from him as to why he continued to keep his father at Axon hospital despite the poor facilities and inadequate medical treatment.  Nothing prevented the complainant to shift his father to a higher center like Manipal hospital, St. Johns Hospital which are not far away from Axon hospital.  It is not that the complainant was not aware of the facilities available at Manipal Hospital or St. Johns hospital since he is permanent resident of Indiranagar.  The complainant also nowhere alleges that the line of treatment given to his father at Axon hospital was in-correct.  Moreover after the discharge from Axon hospital, the complainant has taken his father to home instead of taking him to a better hospital if at all he was not happy with the line of treatment given at Axon hospital.  The decision of keeping his father at his house after discharge was that of the complainant only.

11. Subsequent to the discharge of his father from Axon hospital the complainant never made any attempts to bring his father to OP hospital for further treatment/better treatment.  There is also no expert evidence on record to believe that the diagnosis made and the treatment given at Axon hospital was incorrect.  When the father of the complainant was never treated at OP hospital at any point of time and when the complainant has not paid any money to the OP hospital for any services we don’t understand how the complainant justifies the present claim made against the OP hospital.  The OP hospital cannot be made responsible for any wrong diagnosis or treatment, if any, by the doctors at Axon hospital.  The OP hospital also cannot be made to pay for any inadequate treatment or insufficient treatment given to the father of the complainant at Axon hospital.  The complainant who noticed on the very first day that the ICU facilities at Axon hospital are not satisfactory he ought to have immediately shifted his father to a better center rather than continuing at Axon hospital.  Therefore, we are of considered opinion that the OP hospital cannot be held responsible either for wrong treatment, inadequate treatment, if any, offered at Axon hospital.  If at all the complainant has any complaint regarding deficiency in service resulting in death of his father he should have initiated proceedings against the hospital where his father was treated, but not against the OP hospital where his father was never treated.  The self serving testimony of the complainant alone, in the absence of other credible evidence it is possible to believe that Dr.Karthik advised the complainant to take his father only to Axon hospital.  Nothing prevented the complainant to shift his father to a better hospital, if he was of the opinion that ICU facilities are not good and specialist doctors are not available at Axon hospital.  We do not have any reason to believe that Dr.Karthik was in any way interested to see that the complainant takes his father only to Axon hospital and not to any other hospital.

12. In the given circumstances of the case, absolutely we have no reasons to held either Dr.Karthik or the OP hospital responsible for the expenses incurred by the complainant for the treatment of his father and for the death of his father.  The paper cuttings which have been furnished by the complainant will not come to his aid since there is no material on record to believe that Dr.Karthik was in any way interested to see that the complainant takes his father only to Axon hospital.  Therefore, we are of the opinion that the complaint not maintainable against OP hospital and is liable to be dismissed.  In the result, we proceed to pass the following:     

  O R D E R

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is dismissed.  No order as to costs.

Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this 05^th day of September 2015)

MEMBER                            MEMBER                    PRESIDENT

Vln*