IN THE COURT OF THE LD. DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT S I L I G U R I.

CONSUMER CASE NO. :106/S/2015.                      DATED :15.11.2016.   

BEFORE  PRESIDENT              : SRI BISWANATH DE,

                                                              President, D.C.D.R.F., Siliguri.

                      MEMBERS              : SMT. PRATITI BHATTACHARYYA &

                                                              SRI PABITRA MAZUMDAR.

COMPLAINANT             : SMT. USHA BISWAS,

  W/O Sri Hem Chandra Biswas,

  Resident of Ghogomali, under Ward No.37,

  P.S.- Bhaktinagar, Dist.- Jalpaiguri,

  Mob. No.- 98320 49020.

O.P Nos.        1.                        : DR. BISWAJIT GHOSH,

  Chiriya More, Near Kadamtala BSF Camp,

  P.O.- Kadamtala, P.S. – Matigara,

  Dist.- Darjeeling, Pin – 734 011.

                        2.                        : MR. SABYASACHI DAS,

  The Superintendent,

  North Bengal Medical College & Hospital,

  P.O. – Sushruta Nagar, P.S.- Matigara,

  Dist.- Darjeeling, PIN – 734 012.

3.                    : MEDIVIEW CLINIC,

  (Unit of Ramkrishna Seva Sadan),

  Bidhan Road, Opposite Doly Inn,

  P.O.- Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling,

  PIN – 734 001.

FOR THE COMPLAINANT         : Sri Santanu Chakraborty, Advocate.

       J U D G E M E N T

Sri Biswanath De, Ld. President.

The case of the complainant in a nutshell is that on 10.04.2015 the husband of the complainant Hem Chandra Biswas met with an accident by an Active Scotty being number as WB-74-A/6626 in which Sourav Das was driver.  Due to accident, the hip joint bone was badly damaged.  The age of the injured was 76 years.  He was treated by OP No.1 who operated the hip joint on a contract of Rs.40,000/-.  But the husband of the petitioner was very bad and an imputation of leg was urgently needed.  Hence, the patient was taken to OP No.3 who suggested to insert steel plate inside the body to save the hip joint

Contd......P/2

-:2:-

and thus operation was done on 11.04.2015 and patient was released on 13.04.2015.  But the operation was not successful which was found after X-ray, it was found that there were three screws attached with the hip bones which was broken.  But that doctor OP No.1 after observing X-ray report through it out and advised to taken pain killer.  Thereafter, the patient was taken to North Bengal Medical College & Hospital.  The doctor told that there was no such machine to open such type of screws at Medical College.  Thereafter, the patient was admitted under OP No.2/Superintendent, North Bengal Medical College & Hospital on 25.05.2015, as he took initiative and made commitment to overcome the situation.  It is also stated that on the next day OP No.1 came running in the morning and wanted to handover the complainant and her family Rs.30,000/- as he earned for the said operation and to vacate the North Bengal Medical College & Hospital bed.  In the meantime OP No.2 went away on leave without prior intimation to the complainant.  On 31.05.2015, the patient was released without any single treatment at the said North Bengal Medical College & Hospital.  The patient was without treatment for another four days at the Medicine ward.  However, the patient was admitted under OP No.2, Superintendent, NBMC & H, and second operation took place at the NBMC & H on 30.06.2015.  The patient party came to know from the on duty doctor that one screw could not operated as there was requirement of cutting the bone.  The seriousness and condition of the patient could not take the next operation.  The patient was discharged on 20.07.2015.  The complainant in this way for the treatment of the patient incurred expenses of Rs.2,00,000/- taking loan from other persons.  Later on, in spite of affording huge sum of money the patient died.  Legal notice was sent by the advocate on 25.08.2015, but to no effect.  Hence, the prayer for compensation from OP No.1, OP No.2 and OP No.3 totalling Rs.15,00,000/-. 

OP No.3 appeared and filed written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations as raised by the complainant.  The case of the OP No.3 Mediview Clinic is that OP No.3 is a private nursing home.  The OP No.1 is Dr. Biswajit Ghosh who operated the husband of the complainant on 11.04.2015 and doctor suggested inserting steel plate inside the body to set the hip joint.  Doctor operated the patient in his own risk and responsibility.  The nursing home authority cannot responsible for that operation.  The doctor had used only the OT of OP No.3.  The complainant did not pay the bill and for that reason no money receipt had been issued by the nursing home authority.  OP

Contd......P/3

-:3:-

No.3 also stated that in paragraph 4 of the complainant it would be seen that the OP No.1 operated the bone of his hip joining on a contract of Rs.40,000/-.  The complainant paid Rs.40,000/- only to the driver Mintu and the negotiation was done between the driver Mintu and the OP No.1.  Save and except this, this OP had no knowledge regarding the post and pre treatment of the patient.     

To prove the case, the complainant has filed the following documents:-

1.       Xerox copy of the lawyer notice dated 25^th August, 2015 (Annexure-1).

2.       Xerox copy of the postal receipt sent to OPs on 25.08.2015 (Anex- 2).

3.       Xerox copy of the A/D card returned back from the OPs on 26/08/2015 & 27/08/2015 (Annexure-3).

4.       Xerox copy of the Discharge certificate of the OP No.3 showing Bed No.M-3 Registration No.283/15.

5.       Xerox copy of the North Bengal Medical College Hospital treatment papers and prescriptions (Annexure -5).

          Complainant has filed evidence in-chief.

OP No.3 did not file evidence-in-chief.

Points for determination

1.       Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs ?

2.       Is the complainant entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

Decision with reason

          Both issues are taken up together for the brevity and convenience of discussion.

The complainant in his evidence-in-chief has stated that on 10.04.2015 her husband Hem Chandra Biswas met an accident by an Activa Scotty being number as WB 74 A 6626 in which Sourav Das was the driver.  In such accident the hip joint (bone) of her husband was badly damaged as her husband was at the age of 76 years and could not resist the blow and got heard injury.  The complainant further stated that OP No.1 operated the bone of her husband’s hip joint on a contract of Rs.40,000/- as the negotiation settled by Mintu, who was the Ambulance driver.  The operation procedure was not taken seriously or negligent act turned the operation into bad.  The complainant further stated that due to unfair trade practice adopted by the OP No.1, the husband of the complainant had suffered loss, injury and damage and put to

Contd......P/4

-:4:-

almost death, amputation of leg is urgently needed.  On request of Mintu, driver, complainant husband was taken to OP No.3 where OP No.1 suggested to insert steel plate inside the body to set the hip joint and on his suggestion and confidence, the operation was done on 11/04/2015 and the patient was released on 13/04/2015.  But after one month of release, the complainant’s husband was unbearable and intolerable with pain as no pain killer medicine could stop his shouting.  Then the complainant took the X-ray of the operated area and detected that it was no plate inside as suggested by the doctor – the OP No.1 but there was iron 3 (three) screws attached with hip bones which was broken.  It also appears from the averments of the OP No.3 that OP No.1 made operation and insertion of screws in the nursing of OP No.3.  OP No.3 is not in any way connected with the faulty operation upon the patient.  So, as per admission of OP No.3 the total responsibility is on the OP No.1 who has made treatment on the patient by operation which is not according to surgical and implantation of plat in the fracture area.  Merely insertion of screw is not curable medical treatment for the patient in this complaint.  So, the act of the OP No.1 itself shows that he acted negligently and without due care and attention and for the interest of the patient and such negligent act of the OP No.1 failed to give relief to the complainant’s husband.  Accordingly, in spite of bearing with heavy expenses for the treatment of deceased who died after wrong treatment of OP No.1. 

In the result, the case succeeds and the complainant is entitled to get compensation as per her prayer.

It is the careless of the doctor for which the complainant became widow and lost her husband forever causing mental suffering and depriving the complainant from the companionship of her husband. 

The complainant is entitled to get full compensation as per her prayer from the OP No.1.          

Hence, it is

                     O R D E R E D

that the Consumer Case No.106/S/2015 is allowed exparte against the OP No.1 with cost, and the case is dismissed exparte against the OP No.2 without cost and the case is dismissed on contest against the OP No.3, but without cost.

The complainant is entitled to get the entire treatment cost of Rs.2,50,000/- from the OP No.1.

Contd......P/5

-:5:-

The complainant is further entitled to get Rs.5,00,000/- from the OP No.1 towards compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.

The complainant is further entitled to get Rs.20,000/- on account of litigation cost from the OP No.1.

The complainant is further entitled to get interest @ 9% per annum on the awarded sum of Rs.7,50,000/- from the date of filing of this case till full realization.   

The OP No.1 is directed to pay the entire treatment cost of Rs.2,50,000/- to the complainant by issuing an account payee cheque in the name of the complainant within 45 days of this order.

The OP No.1 is further directed to pay Rs.5,00,000/- by issuing an account payee cheque in the name of the complainant towards compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment, within 45 days from the date of this order.

The OP No.1 is further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- by issuing an account payee cheque in the name of the complainant for litigation cost, within 45 days from the date of this order.

The OP No.1 is further directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the awarded sum of Rs.7,50,000/- from the date of filing of this case till full realization.

Failing which the amount will carry further interest @ 9% per annum on the awarded sum of Rs.7,50,000/- from the date of this order till full realization.

In case of default, the complainant is at liberty to execute this order through this Forum as per law.          

Let copies of this judgment be supplied to the parties free of cost.

  -Member-                           -Member-                       -President-