BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 71 of 2013
Date of Institution : 11.3.2013
Date of Decision : 1.6.2016
Jaspal Singh son of Sh.Jagga Singh, aged about 32 years r/o Chauhan Nagar, Sirsa Road, Mandi Dabwali, distt. Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
- Dr.Ramesh Kumar, Ramesh Bones and Joints Hospital, Malout Road, Opp-Ch.Devi Lal Park, Mandi Dabwali.
2. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Reg. Office at 54, Vinobha Puri, Lajpat
Nagar-II, New Delhi-110024.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH.S.B.LOHIA………………. ……PRESIDENT.
SHRI RAJIV MEHTA ……… MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Shingara Singh, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Manminder Singh, Advocate for Opposite party no.1.
Sh.A.K.Monga,, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
In brief, case of the complainant is that on 8.2.2012 he was brought to the hospital of opposite party no.1 due to fracture at two places in his right leg, occurred in an accident. On the same date, the complainant was operated upon and some plates in the right leg were fixed. He was discharged from the hospital on 10.2.2012 and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- were charged as expenses of medicines and operation fee etc. After sometime, due to pain in his said leg, the complainant was again taken to the hospital of opposite party, who advised some medicines and told that some minor problem usually occur after operation and with the passage of time, the same will be cured. The complainant time and again visited the hospital of opposite party but he did not get any relief. Ultimately, the complainant visited the Arora Orthopedics Hospital, Barwala road, Hisar, where it was found by the doctor that in fact rod was to be fixed instead of plates and there has been infection in the leg as the operation has not been conducted properly. The doctor told that immediate operation is required and the complainant was operated upon in the said hospital. The doctor had also given writing about improper and wrong operation done by opposite party. Thus, it all happened due to negligence and improper service of opposite party. Hence, the present complaint.
2. Opposite party no.1 appeared and contested the case by filing reply. It is submitted that the complainant was admitted in his hospital on 7.5.2011 and after first aid, x-ray was conducted. He was having fracture femur proximal third femur and fracture intracondylar (distal Third) of same femur on the right leg and the complainant was advised for operation. Information of accident was also sent to the police. Proper treatment was given to the complainant and was discharged on 10.5.2011 after charging Rs.26000/- for treatment. Thus, the complainant has concealed the date of his first admission and discharge. Sutures were removed after 14 days and the complainant was advised to come after one month for partial weight wearing with walker and after one month, there was nothing abnormal. Thereafter, the complainant came to the hospital after 9 months of operation with pain in thigh and with history of sudden twisting movement while walking on stairs and fall. On examination, patient was having swelling in thigh he was advised for removal of small amount of haematoma and thus, he was admitted on 8.2.2012 and was discharged on 10.2.2012. Remaining averments regarding treatment of the complainant in Arora hospital have been denied for want of knowledge and it is pleaded that the complainant has wrongly concocted a story in order to extract money. There was no negligence on his part.
3. Opposite party no.2 in its reply admitted that opposite party no.1 was insured with it from 5.10.2010 to 4.10.2011 and regarding other averments, it is prayed that the written statement of op no.1 be considered as written statement of op no.2.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered in evidence
the documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C44, which are medical records, legal notice and its reply and acknowledgement etc. respectively; whereas the Op no.1 produced Ex.OPA-his own supporting affidavit and OP1 to OP11.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. It is admitted fact that the complainant was admitted in the hospital of opposite party no.1 and was operated upon for his right leg. But, as per the averments of the complainant, he was admitted and operated upon by op no.1 on 8.2.2012 and was discharged from his hospital on 10.2.2012, whereas the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant was firstly admitted and operated upon for his right leg by him on 7.5.2011 and was discharged from the hospital on 10.5.2011. To prove this contention, the opposite party no.1 has placed on record the medical records of the complainant. From the perusal of medical records Ex.OP5 and OP6, it is revealed that the complainant was firstly admitted in the hospital of op no.1 on 7.5.2011 and discharged from there on 10.5.2011. The declaration given by attendant of the complainant namely Jagga Singh regarding consent of operation has also been enclosed. Thus, in our view, the complainant has concealed the material facts regarding his first admission on 7.5.2011 in the hospital of op no.1 and also regarding his operation on that date. Therefore, the complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct to file the present complaint.
7. Secondly, the complainant has not placed on record any affidavit to prove his abovesaid allegations of negligence and carelessness of the doctor-op no.1. Thirdly, the complainant has failed to show any record/writing of Dr.Arora to prove that the operation conducted by op no.1 was wrong. Fourthly, from the documents Ex.OP2 to OP4, it is transpired that Op no.1 is a bachelor of medicine and surgery and is also Diploma holder in Orthopaedics. He is practicing as a doctor.
8. Keeping in view the abovesaid discussion, we are of the opinion that as the complainant has failed to prove any record that the opposite party treated him wrongly, therefore, the complainant is not entitled for any compensation etc.
9. Resultantly, present complaint of the complainant stands dismissed with no order as to cost. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
