BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

                                                          Complaint No.: 189 of 2015.

                                                         Date of Institution: 06.07.2015.

                                                          Date of Order: 01.03.2019.

Sewati aged 63 years, wife of Shri Kanwar Singh son of Shri Juthar, resident of ward No.3, Hari Nagar, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri. 

                                                                   …..Complainant.

                    Versus

Dr. Inderjeet Singh Arora, Inderjeet Hospital, circular Road, near Rohtak Gate, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

…...Opposite Party.

                   COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 12 AND 13 OF

                   THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before: -      Hon’ble Mr. Manjit Singh Naryal, President.

                   Hon’ble Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member.

                   Hon’ble Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Member.

Present:       Shri Anil Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

Shri Ashish Mittal, Advocate for the OP (already exparte).

ORDER:-

PER MANJIT SINGH NARYAL, PRESIDENT

                   Brief facts of the case are that complainant is an old lady and is patient of Sugar, B.P. and was patient of access bleeding and she approached to OP with her husband in the month of March, 2014 for her treatment and again on 10.4.2014.  It is further alleged that the OP has advised the complainant that the excess bleeding can be stopped after removing the uterus from the body by way of operation and for that all the tests i.e. Sugar, B.P., Urinal etc., which were necessary to be conducted before the operation were got done and after the OP had admitted the complainant in his hospital for operation.  It is further alleged that on 11.4.2014 at about 1.00 pm, complainant was taken to OT by the team members of OP doctor and after operation complainant and her husband came to know that during operation, complainant has suffered brain hemorrhage and due to that her left side body is paralyzed.  It is further alleged that when complainant’s husband asked the OP about the reason, he behaved very badly and did not give a satisfactory reply and on the next day i.e. on 12.4.2014, complainant was discharged by the OP after saying that “get the treatment from somewhere else”.  It is further alleged that the complainant was taken to the Hospital of Dr. V. K. Gupta, Neuro Surgeon at Hisar and Doctor had referred her to Delhi, because of her serious condition.  It is further alleged that thereafter complainant was got admitted at Fortis Hospital, Gurgaon and at present she is getting treatment from Fortis Hospital, Gurgaon.  It is further alleged that the OP doctor failed in controlling the Sugar and B.P. of the complainant during the operation and also spare her in serious condition after saying that “get treatment from somewhere else” and in this way, had failed to attain the standard of care and complainant has suffered damages due to the act and conduct of the OP and dereliction of duty on the part of the accused.  It is further alleged that the complainant has moved a complaint dated 20.5.2014 to the S.P., Bhiwani against the OP, but policy did not take any action against the OP till date.  It is further alleged that due to negligence of OP for not providing proper medical treatment, life of complainant has got spoiled.  It is further alleged that a legal notice dated 6.5.2015 was served upon OP through Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate Bhiwani, which was replied by the OP by concocting false story and did not compensate the complainant.  It is further alleged that the complainant’s family has incurred a huge amount on her treatment i.e. Rs. 2,55,328/- and her treatment is still going on and more amount shall have to be incurred on her treatment.  It is further alleged that the OP has project herself as qualified and competent caesarean specialist and Gynecologist and believing him, complainant has admitted in OP’s Nursing Home, but the OP failed in treating the complainant in proper manner and with full care, which resulting into the paralysis of complainant.  It is further alleged that the operation theatre was very dirty and was not equipped with the machinery required for caesarean operation. It is further alleged that complainant was misguided by the OP just to extort money from her.  Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP.  Hence, the present complaint.

2.                On notice, no one appeared on behalf of the OP and the OP was proceeded as exparte vide order dated 10.9.2015.  Lateron OP has appeared and filed the written statement without setting aside exparte order, thus, the written statement cannot be read. 

3.                The complainant to prove his case placed on record the documents Annexure C1 to C72 and closed the evidence. 

4.                 We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties at length and gone through the case file very carefully.

5.                Ld. Counsel for the OP has argued that the complainant is 59 years old age and was a known case of diabetes and hypertension i.e. B.P. and she came to the OP hospital, as OPD patient on 20.3.2014 with complaint of bleeding from vagina for last one month.  He further argued that in addition the complainant had DM & T, VSG, Fibroid Uterus, she was advised surgery whenever BP and sugar is controlled and the complainant was advised treatment and she kept on taking drugs advised for controlling B.P. and Sugar.  He further argued that Dr. Sanjeev Garg examined the complainant and he found the patient fit for operation and on 11.4.2014 she was operated and her Uterus was removed and after the operation she remained well.  He further argued that on 12.4.2014 at about 6.00 pm she developed decrease in body movement of left side and headache and then urgent CT Scan of the head of the complainant was got done, which reveals an Infra Cranil Bleeding (Paralytic Attach because of bleeding in Brain) and the attendants of the complainant were informed about paralysis and the patient was advised treatment by Neuro Surgeon at Higher Centre.  He further argued that attendants of the complainant were interested to take away the patient to Neuro Surgeon at Hisar, hence, she was referred to Hisar.  He further argued that after 12.4.2014 neither the patient nor her attendants has ever come to the hospital of the OP and they have not lodged any complaint of any sort about the treatment given by the OP and at the time of referring the complainant to Hisar, the complainant and her attendants were fully satisfied with the treatment given by the OP.  Ld. Counsel for the OP has placed on record the documents Annexure R1 to R8.

6.                After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties at length and having gone through the material available on the record, we are of the considered view that the complaint of the complainant deserves dismissal, as she has miserably failed to prove her case by producing some cogent and convincing evidence to prove deficiency in service on the part of OP.  It is admitted fact that the complainant was operated by the OP and her uterus was removed.  It is also admitted fact that the complainant is patient of Sugar and B.P. and before the operation the OP doctor has given the medicines for controlling Sugar and B.P. of the complainant.  It is also admitted fact that the B.P. and Sugar of the complainant were controlled and thereafter the operation was conducted by the OP doctor.  It is also admitted fact that all the tests, which were necessary before the operation were got conducted by the OP.  The only plea taken by the complainant is that the OP has failed in controlling the B.P. & Sugar of the complainant during the operation, due to which complainant has suffered brain hemorrhage and her left side body paralyzed.  In our view, the plea taken by the complainant has no substance, because she has not placed on record some cogent and convincing evidence to prove any negligence on the part of the OP doctor.  The onus to prove that there is negligence on the part of operating doctor is upon the complainant, but the complainant has failed in doing so.  Mere making pleadings that the OP has failed in controlling the B.P. & Sugar of the complainant during the operation, due to which complainant has suffered brain hemorrhage and her left side body paralyzed is not sufficient, the complainant has to prove this fact by producing some cogent & convincing documentary evidence, but she failed to do so.  So, the plea taken by the complainant has no merit in the eyes of law and the same are hereby rejected.

7.                Therefore, in view of the facts & circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and as such, complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed and as such, the complaint of the complainant is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copies of the order be sent to parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance. 

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: - 01.03.2019.               

(Saroj Bala Bohra)                    (Parmod Kumar)        (Manjit Singh Naryal)

Member.                        Member.                         President,

                                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                     Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.