BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 106 of 2015.
Date of Institution : 4.6.2015
Date of Decision : 31.1.2017.
Ishwar son of Sh. Dhariya Singh, resident of Gali No.4, Satnam Chowk, Kanganpur Road, Sirsa, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
Dr. V.P. Goyal, Holy Nursing Home, Near Sharma Petrol Pump, Sangwan Chowk, Dabwali Road, Sirsa, District Sirsa, Haryana.
...…Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH.S.B.LOHIA………………. ……PRESIDENT.
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ……… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. A.K. Beniwal, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. A.K. Gupta, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
The case of the complainant in brief is that on 24.8.2013, he suffered chest pain and listened from a close relative about the op’s treatment regarding the same disease as he is a specialist of the same disease, so he decided to get treatment from op. The complainant approached opposite party on 24.8.2013 and op made some clinical observations and confirmations and after all this he advised the complainant that he got a heart attack and pain was due to that heart attack and advised him for immediate admission in his hospital. The complainant while believing on his advise and observations was admitted in his hospital for next eight days for treatment of chest pain and during that period many medical tests were conducted by op and expensive medicines were given to him, upon which about Rs.70,000/- were incurred by complainant. After that he was discharged from hospital, but after some days he again suffered chest pain. It is further averred that from the day of his appointment to last appointment i.e. from 24.8.2013 to 17.3.2015 with the op’s hospital, the complainant paid several visits to his hospital, many tests had been conducted by op and many expensive medicines were given but he never relieved from his problem until he went to Jindal Institute of Medical Sciences, Model Town, Hisar. The doctors of said institute told him after conducting their clinical observations and confirmations that he is not a patient of cardiac attack or any cardiac related disease, his heart is healthy. After hearing this, the complainant was stunned, shocked and surprised because at Jindal Hospital, it was confirmed that is having gall bladder stone history only and the pain which was earlier treated by the op was due to the stone. It is further averred that due to the op’s sole negligence, deficiency in services and wrong treatment from last about two years, the complainant got treatment of a disease from which he was not suffering and also suffered physical, financial, health loss and mental pain and also side effects of medicines given by the op and now again he has to undergo further treatment from another hospital which shall cause heavy loss to him. It is further averred that a registered notice dated 30.4.2015 was sent by complainant to the op to refund the amount which was spent by him in last two years i.e. about Rs.5,00,000/- and also to compensate him with an amount of Rs.ten lac but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It has been submitted that answering op is a well qualified M.D. doctor and has been running his hospital for the last twenty years. The hospital is well equipped with dealing with the emergencies and has been providing the medical services to the patients successfully. The complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum. As a matter of fact, he was brought to the hospital of answering op on 18.8.2013, complaining of chest pain. Clinically the status of the complainant was observed by op and he was found to be having angina pain, which is ischemic heart disease and immediately keeping in view the clinical status of complainant, medicines were prescribed and answering op advised for investigations. Thereafter, the complainant was again brought to the hospital of op on 24.8.2013 having a chest pain and fever for unknown reasons. According to the clinical observations, the answering op got him admitted up to 26.8.2013 and treatment for fever and chest pain was given and was kept under observation. Thereafter, on 16.9.2013, again the patient came with lower back ache and accordingly the medicines was prescribed. The patient again came on 17.11.2013 on which date he was feeling well. Then on 3.12.2013, the complainant came to the hospital of op and desired that he wants to give up smoking and accordingly he was referred to psychiatrist. Thereafter, the patient came to the hospital on 10.3.2015 after more than 15 months and was diagnosed as having a gall bladder stone. The complainant was also having occasional pain chest and medicines were accordingly prescribed. The complainant had angina problem as per the diagnosis of answering op. The complainant has stated to have got a coronary angiography at Jindal Hospital, Hisar for detecting the blockage in three main arteries. However, the angiography can be conducted only on three main arteries of the heart. No angiography can be conducted for collateral arteries and as such the angina pain still cannot be ruled out and that is why as per the record produced by the complainant on file, the medical officers of Jindal Hospital have also prescribed the same medicines even after conducted the angiography, which were prescribed by the op for angina pain. As per the clinical observation and diagnose made by answering op, the complainant was having the symptoms of angina pain and he has been rightly treated. It is incorrect that the op has declared heart attack to complainant rather he was apprised of his angina pain as well as the fever. It is also incorrect that complainant was charged Rs.70,000/- as alleged. It is only after 10.3.2015 that the complainant was diagnosed as having gall bladder stone also, accordingly he was advised the further course of treatment. With these averments, dismissal of complaint has been prayed for.
3. By way of evidence, complainant has produced his affidavit Ex.C1, postal receipt Ex.C2, legal notice Ex.C3, copies of treatment record, tests reports and copies of medical bills Ex.C4 to Ex.C47 and affidavit of Monu Kumar son of complainant Ex.C1/A. On the other hand, the op tendered his affidavit Ex.R1.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
5. There is nothing on file to suggest that opposite party ever declared the complainant that he suffered heart attack. According to the op, the complainant came in his hospital as a OPD patient on 18.8.2013 having chest pain for which he prescribed medicines for angina as per the clinical status and advised for further investigations. Thereafter, on 24.8.2013, he was brought to his hospital having pyroxia as well as chest pain and as such he was admitted as indoor patient for observation and was treated up to 26.8.2013. The complainant was also apprised of his angina pain as well as the fever. As there were signs of improvement of his health, he was discharged with a follow up advise and he had been coming for further checkup on different dates till December, 2013. The opposite party is a physician and specialist of heart disease and had he declared the complainant suffering from heart attack, he could have got conducted angiography of the complainant but that has not been got done by the opposite party and that he only treated the patient for angina pain. The opposite party got conducted various other tests and x-ray of the complainant and in the copy of x-ray report dated 20.9.2013 of Sirsa Diagnostic Centre, Sirsa Ex.C10, it is mentioned that no gross abnormality seen in x-ray of right chest AP. The complainant has not proved that the treatment given by the op doctor was not relating to angina pain. The op has also taken a plea that complainant was addicted to smoking, which is the major cause for the angina/ ischemic heart disease and the complainant has failed to controvert this plea. It is also the case of the opposite party that record of Jindal Hospital shows that same medicines were prescribed for angina pain as were prescribed by the op and there is nothing on file to contradict the above said stand of the opposite party. The doctor of Jindal Hospital, Hisar after getting conducted angiography of the complainant also prescribed medicines for chest pain. From the ultra sound report dated 8.4.2015 of Garg Diagnostic Centre Ex.C20, it is evident that stones were seen in gall bladder but from that document the complainant cannot take any help which can be said a different and subsequent disease. So, the complainant has failed to prove his case. The authorities cited by learned counsel for complainant in case titled as V. Kishan Rao Vs. Nikhil Super Specialty Hospital & anr. 2010 (5) SSC 513 is not applicable in this case being on different footing that claim of petitioners cannot be rejected only on the ground that expert witness was not examined to prove negligence of doctor and it is not required to have expert evidence in all cases of medical negligence but in this case from the record available on file it is apparently clear that op doctor did not commit any type of medical negligence. The authority of Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as Dr. Shakuntala Banale Vs. Anita, 2015 (2) CLT 282 cited by learned counsel for complainant is also not applicable in this case because in this case there is no plea of limitation on behalf of opposite party.
6. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that there is no merit in the present complaint. Resultantly, the present complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: 31.1.2017. Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
