BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.1428/2014

DATED ON THIS THE  27^th October 2017

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                B.E., LLB., PGDCLP    - MEMBER

Sri DEVAKUMAR.M.C,

Member

1.     The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act 1986 against the opposite party, alleging negligence and deficiency in service and seeking a relief of a total sum of Rs.19,05,000/- towards damages with other reliefs.
2.     The complainant underwent treatment at opposite party’s hospital for his left leg pain on 18.05.2013.  The doctors treated the complainant based on considering the various test reports.  The complainant alleged that, after knowing the mediclaim policy in his favour, the doctors prescribed unnecessary tests, without proper treatment.  Hence, the complaint alleging negligence and deficiency in service and seeking reliefs.
3.     The opposite party denied the allegations in its version.  It submits, the complainant took treatment on 07.08.2009, subsequently approached on 18.05.2013.  The doctor after going through the Doppler test, prescribed medications.  As such, there was no negligence and deficiency in service and are not liable to pay any compensation as claimed and prays for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4.    The parties led evidence by filing affidavit and relied on several documents to establish their contentions.  Counsel for both the parties submitted oral arguments.  Perusing the material on record, matter posted for orders.
5.     The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant establishes the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party hospital in not providing proper treatment to the ailments and conducting of irrelevant diagnostic tests and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought?
2.  To what order?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- In the negative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.    Point No.1:- The complainant visited opposite party hospital on 18.05.2013, suffering from pain on his left leg.  The doctor advised for Doppler test.  Based on the report, the doctor prescribed medicatinos.
8.    The doctor advised for a C.T. Angio of lower limbs.  Further, on 14.02.2014, underwent angioplasty to left SFA.  Another Doppler test was done on 15.02.2014, but the report generated was similar to the one report generated on 18.05.2013.
9.     The doctor was consulted on 24.02.2014, who prescribed certain medication, but no relief from severe pain. On 01.04.2014, a stent was implanted.  Later on 03.04.2014, a Doppler test was done at St.Joseph Hospital, Mysuru.
10. It is alleged that, the opposite party hospital, conducted unnecessary and false tests and generated false reports to charge exorbitant amount and has collected Rs.2,06,000/- by cheating.  Thereby, highly aggrieved by the treatment, alleged the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party hospital and sought for the reliefs.
11. The opposite party denied the allegations and contended that, due to lack of knowledge about the ailments and with a malafide intention of making an unlawful gain only, the complaint is filed.
12. The opposite party contended that, the complainant visited hospital on 07.08.2009 with a complaint of lumber pain and pain in his left leg and history of numbness since past one month.  He was diagnosed with lumber disc prolapsed at L4 and L5.
13. After the lapse of about four years, visited the hospital on 18.05.2013, with a complaint of chronic backache, cramps. On examination, the doctor advised for a Doppler test of lower limb arteries.  The cardiologist, after going through the report, prescribed medications.  On 10.02.2014, when consulted at hospital, the doctor considering the past history, advised for a C.T. Angiography of lower limbs and prescribed medications, on several occasions, as and when the complainant visited the hospital with various ailments.
14. The opposite party further denied the allegation of Doppler test conducted on 15.02.2014, and the report generated by radiological department on 18.05.2013 only as false.  The report was generated along with other bills, prescription with treatment report, before discharge of the complainant, on 16.02.2014.  As such, the allegations are denied.  Thereby, the opposite party hospital denied the allegation of negligence and deficiency in service on their part and are not entitled for the reliefs as claimed and hence prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.
15. From the material available on record, it is established that, the complainant got admitted to opposite party hospital and obtained treatment for his ailments.  The treating doctor prescribed medications based on the diagnostic reports, with proper advice.  The complainant failed to establish his allegations of negligence and deficiency in service by the opposite party hospital, by means of any material evidence and also by any expert evidence.  The documents placed on record, does not support the allegations of the complainant, rather, they support that the complainant underwent treatment and medications prescribed by the treating doctors of opposite party hospital.  Therefore, we opine that, the opposite party has not committed any negligence and deficiency in service, while treating the complainant, as such, the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs as sought from the opposite party.  Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in the negative.
16. Point No.2:- In view of the observations made in point no.1, we proceed to pass the following

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
2. Give a copy of this order to both parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 27^th October 2017)

                          (H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY) 

                                      PRESIDENT     

(M.V.BHARATHI)                           (DEVAKUMAR.M.C.)

      MEMBER                                         MEMBER