Date of filing : 01.12.2020
Date of Order : 28.02.2023
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VELLORE
PRESENT: THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A., B.L. PRESIDENT
THIRU. R. ASGHAR KHAN, B.Sc., B.L. MEMBER – I
SELVI. I. MARIAN RAJAM ANUGRAHA, M.B.A., MEMBER-II
TUESDAY THE 28th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 14/2020
1. Mrs. M. Kokila
W/o. Kaviyarasan
2. Minor. Pugazharasan,
S/o. Kaviyarasan
3. Minor. Kaviperarasan
S/o. Kaviyarasan
Minors are represented by their mother and guardian
M.Kokila the 1st complainant, all are residing at
No. 83/386/1, Bajanai Kovil Street,
RK pet, Adhivaragapuram Village,
Pallipattu Taluk,
Tiruvallur District.
...Complainants
-Vs-
Dr. K. L. Ravi
S/o. Kumarvel,
Ravi Bharathi Hospital,
No.36, Krishnamoorthy Muthali Street,
Sholingur,
Sholingur Taluk. ...Opposite party
Counsel for complainants : Thiru. T.M. Vijayaragavalu
Counsel for opposite party : Thiru. AAV Partners
ORDER
THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A., B.L. PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complainant has prayed this Hon’ble Commission to direct the opposite party to pay the complainants the amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakhs Only) as complaint mentioned amount with interest and costs and further grants any other relief with this Hon’ble commission may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case.
1.The Case of the complaint is briefly as follows:
The first complainant and her husband went to the opposite party’s hospital for routine check-up after her pregnancy on 06.12.2018 at the time of check-up the complainant’s husband had cough, sneezing, therefore they decided to take treatment for this as well the opposite party charged Rs.150/- as consultation charge and the same was paid by the complainant’s husband. The opposite party without doing any physical examination administered and injection to the complainant. After administering the injection, the complainant’s husband had watery emission from his mouth and nose, fell down struggling for breath and became unconscious. On seeing the same the first complainant made a call to her father-in-law, who immediately came. Thereafter they took the said complainant to Government Hospital Sholingur and the doctor then on examining the patient referred him to Government Medical Hospital Adukamparai, Vellore for further treatment and as his condition was critical. But he was declared dead at Vellore Medical College Hospital. The allegation the complainant is that due to wrong medicine cefotaxime, which resulted in his death. Therefore, there is a negligence in treating the husband who as a result suffered an untimely death and hence the complainant suffered. Thereafter questioned the opposite party Dr. K.L.Ravi about his utter indifference and carelessness in the treatment and giving an injection with medicine causing harmful and fatal reaction to the patient. Hence, Hari, the father of Kaviyarasan gave a report on 06.12.2018 about it to the Sholinghur Police who registered the case in Crime No. 599/2018 and after post-mortem done in the Government Medical College Hospital, Vellore on 07.12.2018. At the time of his death the first complainant was 7 months pregnant and she is wholly dependent on his income. The complainant also lost her care, love and affection which cannot be compensated at any cost. The said deceased Kaviyarasan, was earning through his contract work nearly Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month. Therefore, the complainant has prayed for Rs.50 lakhs as compensation. Hence, a notice dated 23.11.2020 has been sent to him which he acknowledgment on 24.11.2020 but he neither complied with the demand nor sent any reply. Hence, this complaint.
2. The written version of the opposite party is as follows:
The opposite party denies all the averments and allegations made in the complaint, as the same are false, frivolous and baseless except those that are specifically admitted hereunder. Further the opposite party stating that the patient had approached the opposite party as an outpatient in August 2018 with complaints of fever, cough, sore throat and hemoptysis. He also had history of being a chronic alcoholic and smoker, and was exposed to intense dust pollution. He also had a history of unknown bite at workplace and also had no known history of allergy to drugs and antibiotics. After examination and reviewing the allergy history of the patient, as per medical protocol, the patient was administered a test dose of Cefotaxim Sodium. As no allergic reaction triggered the patient was then administered a full 1mg dose of Cefotaxim Sodium. Thereafter, the patient again approached the opposite party on 06.12.2018 at 10.15 a.m as an outpatient with the complaints of cough, fever, sore throat, hemoptysis and mild breathlessness since five days. The patient insisted for the same antibiotic which was which was given in the last visit the opposite party explained to the patient that without due examination and necessary investigations, certain antibiotics cannot be prescribed. Based on the above examination, the patient was advised to take a Chest X-ray, HINI Screening test and other relevant blood investigations. However, the patient refused to take the above tests. On the same day, after reviewing the patient’s history of allergy towards drugs, a test dose of Cefotaxim Sodium was administered, as per medical protocol. After an hour, at 12:15 p.m as no allergic reaction occurred, the patient was then administered a full 1mg dose of Cefotaxim Sodium in slow iv supine position. The patient was also given necessary medications. The drug was uneventful, and the patient had no complaints of any allergic reaction and thus the patient was mobilized. On reaching the entrance gate of the hospital, the patient complained of giddiness and nausea. On immediate examination, the patient was unconscious, pulses were not felt, BP not recordable, not responding to calls, and the patient was agitated with copious secretions from the mouth. The opposite party suspected the condition/diagnosis of the patient to be fatal anaphylactic shock. Immediately, the patient was given 100% oxygen, oral suctioning, IV-line fluids rush, and administered in iv 1 in 10000 adrenalin (ephipherine) along with other necessary medications in slow iv. The patient was given 100% CPR. After the above procedure and administration of the medications, the patient’s pulse was recordable and mild spontaneous breathing was present but not adequate, Bp was not recordable hence a second dose of 1in 10000 adrenalin iv was administered. After examination and reviewing the allergy history of the patient, the patient was administered a test dose of a Cefotaxim Sodium, as per medical protocol. The opposite party denies the averments in the present complaint. The opposite party with his team of doctors and nurses had treated the complainant with all due care as per standard medical protocol. The opposite party is duly qualified and have been rendering yeomen service for the past numerous years without any blemish. It is unreasonable to state that the opposite party had been negligent in performing his duties. The complainant has miserably failed to demonstrate the manner in which the opposite party has act negligently or deficiently. The complainant have neither filed any documentary evidence nor have they substantiated the alleged negligence in the complaint and have approached this Hon’ble Commission with unclean hands by suppressing the materials facts all in a feeble attempt to unlawfully claim exorbitant amount from this opposite party and to tarnish the hard earned reputation of this opposite party. Since the opposite party had not been deficient in the services there is no cause of action for the instant complaint as against this opposite party and is not liable to pay any sum of money more so the amounts mentioned in the prayed of the complaint, as the entire case of the complainant is based on assumptions and presumptions and deserves to be dismissed in limine. Without prejudice to the above, the exorbitant claims made by the complainant are not supported by any evidence what so ever. Therefore, this Hon’ble Commission may be pleased to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost.
3. Proof affidavit of complainant filed. Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 were marked. Proof affidavit of opposite party filed. Ex.B1 marked. Written arguments of both sides filed. Heard opposite party side oral argument in part.
4. The Points that arises for consideration are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite
party?
2. Whether the complainants are entitled for relief as claimed in the
complaint?
3. To what relief, the complainant is entitled to?
5. POINT NOS. 1 & 2:
The first complainant and her husband went to the opposite party’s hospital for routine check-up after her pregnancy on 06.12.2018. at the time of check-up the complainant’s husband had cough, sneezing, therefore they decided to take treatment for his as well, the opposite party charged Rs.150/- as consultation charge and the same was paid by the complainant’s husband. The opposite party without doing any physical examination administered injection to the complainant. After administering the injection, the complainant’s husband had watery emission from his mouth and nose, fell down struggling for breath and became unconscious. On seeing the same, the first complainant made a call to her father-in- law, who immediately came. Thereafter, they took the said complainant to Government Hospital Sholingur and the doctor then on examining the patient referred him to Government Medical Hospital Adukamparai, Vellore for further treatment and as his condition was critical. But he was declared dead on arrival at Vellore Medical College Hospital. The allegation the complainant is that due to injection of wrong medicine of Cefotaxime her husband died. Therefore, there is a negligence in treating the husband as a result untimely death her husband and hence the complainant suffered lot. At the time of his death the first complainant was 7 months pregnant and she is wholly dependent on his income. The complainant also lost her care, love and affection which cannot be compensated at any cost. The said deceased Kaviyarasan, was earning through his contract work nearly Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month. Therefore, the complainant has prayed for Rs.50 lakhs as compensation.
6. On the other hand, the opposite party in their written version denied the allegation of the complainant and put the complainant into strict proof of the same.. Further the opposite party stating that the patient had approached the opposite party as an outpatient in August 2018 with complainant of fever, cough, sore throat and hemoptysis. He also had history of being a chronic alcoholic and smoker, and was exposed to intense dust pollution. He also had a history of unknown bite at workplace and also had known history of allergic to drugs and antibiotics.
7. After examination and reviewing the allergy history of the patient was administered a test dose of Cefotaxim Sodium. As no allergic reaction triggered the patient was then administered a full dosage of Cefotaxim Sodium. Thereafter the patient again approached the opposite party on 06.12.2018 at 10.15 a.m as an outpatient with the complainant of cough, fever, sore throat and hemoptysis mild breathlessness since 5 days. The patient insisted for the same antibiotic which was given in the last visit and the opposite party explained to the patient that without due examination and necessary investigations, certain antibiotics cannot be prescribed. 8. In this regard we refer to the medical literature which says that if any antibiotic is proposed to be administered, a sensitivity test is to be carried out i.e. 0.5ml of the proposed injection mixed with distilled water and administered as intra- dermal to check urticarial reaction. Further the said literature also denotes that the Cefotaxim injection is used to treat bacterial infections, in many different parts of body. This medicine is also given before, during and after certain type of surgery to prevent injection Cefotaxim injection belongs to the class of medicine known as Cephalosporin antibiotics. It works by killing bacteria or preventing their growth. However, this medicine will not work for flu, or other viral infection. In the present case admittedly, the deceased approached the opposite party for treatment of fever and cold, which commonly is developed by virus and not by the bacteria. Therefore, the choosing of the said injection for treating the deceased itself is wrong and further though the opposite party in their written version states that in August 2018 itself the said deceased Kaviyarasan was administered with Cefotaxim antibiotics after administering a high dose. But in the complaints the complainant for the 1st time, the deceased had approached the opposite party only 06.12.2018 and not as claimed by the opposite party. Since, the opposite party contradict the version of the complainant the burden of proof lies on the opposite party, but the opposite party did not produce any record to show that the deceased had already been treated with Cefotaxim Sodium. Even if it is true, as per the medical literature for subsequent administrative of the injection and blood investigations is necessary to check the allergy if any. But in the present case admittedly, the opposite party did not do any such investigation which he insisted for the same antibiotics. The opposite party put the blame on the deceased.
9. But as far as the medical protocol is concerned that doctor’s only is the fit person to decide which treatment should be given in a situation. Therefore, the argument of the opposite party does not hold good. Further the Ex.A6 the final opinion for the cause of death, confirms that the said deceased kaviyarasan died due to Cefotaxim injection. Therefore, in our consider opinion, we find that there is a negligence in treating the deceased kaviyarasan. Therefore, there is a deficiency in service in treating the complainant’s husband. Hence, these Point Nos.1 and 2 are decided in favour of the complainant.
10. Point No.3: As we have decided in Point Nos.1 and 2 that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees TwentyFive Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant. Hence, this point No.3 is answered accordingly.
In this result, this complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen lakhs only) as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant, within two months from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order to till date of realization.
Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 28th February, 2023.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER – I MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
LIST OF COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex. A1. – Copy of the Aadhar card of M. Kokila
Ex.A2. – Copy of the Aadhar card of Minor Pugazharasan
Ex. A3. – Copy of the Aadhar card of Minor Kaviperarasan
Ex. A4. – Copy of death certificate for the death of Kaviyarasan
Ex. A5. – Copy of the Postmortem Certificate issued by the Government
Vellore Medical college Hospital, Vellore
EX. A6. – Copy of Medical Certificate cause of death of Kaviyarasan
Issued by the Government Vellore Medical College Hospital,
Vellore
Ex. A7 – Copy of the First Information Report registered by the
Sholingur Police against DR. K.L. Ravi
Ex. A8. 23.11.2020 – Copy of the legal notice sent on behalf of the complainants to
Dr. K.L. Ravi
Ex. A9. 24.11.2020 – Copy of Postal Acknowledgement from Dr. K.L. Ravi
LIST OF OPPOSITE PARTY SIDES DOCUMENTS:
Ex-B1 - Paper publication
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER – I MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
