Haryana

Ambala

CC/93/2022

Kiran Chauhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dr.Mrs Sandeep Kaur Dhillon - Opp.Party(s)

Satinder Singh Garg

15 Mar 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	93 of 2022
Date of Institution	:	17.03.2022
Date of decision	:	15.03.2023

1. Smt. Kiran Chauhan aged about 42 years wife of Late Sh. Satish Kumar son of Sh. Jai Pal Singh Chauhan son of Sh.Sawan Singh.
2. Miss Pragati Chauhan aged about 19 years daughter of Late Sh. Satish Kumar son of Sh. Jai Pal Singh Chauhan.
3. Master Mohit Chauhan aged about 15 years of Late Sh. Satish Kumar son of Sh. Jai Pal Singh Chauhan, minor Mohit Chauhan son of Late Sh. Satish Kumar through his mother, next friend and guardian ad-litem namely Smt. Kiran Chauhan wife of Late Sh. Satish Kumar son of Sh. Jai Pal Singh Chauhan.
4. Sh. Jai Pal Singh Chauhan aged about 72 years son of Sh. Sawan Singh,

All Residents of Village Bihta, Tehsil Ambala Cantt, District Ambala (Haryana).

…..Complainants

VERSUS

 

1. Onkar Hospital, Saha Chowk, Shahbad Road, Saha District Ambala (Haryana) through its owner/proprietor Dr. Mrs.Sandeep Kaur Dhillon, M.D. (Gynae).
2. Dr.Mrs.Sandeep Kaur Dhillon, M.D. (Gynae), Owner/proprietor Onkar Hospital, Saha Chowk, Shahbad Road, Saha District Ambala (Haryana).

….…. Opposite Parties

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                             Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

          Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:      Shri Satinder Singh Garg, Advocate, counsel for the complainants.

                    Shri Tarun Mehta, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.  

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainants have filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To pay compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- along with interest @18% p.a. till its realization, from the filing of complaint, till its realization, on account of the death of Sh.Satish Kumar due to gross medical negligence of the OPs in not treating Shri Satish Kumar (now deceased), properly as required under Medical Ethics.
2. To pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for the mental agony, torture and physical harassment and inconvenience suffered by the complainants.
3. To pay Rs.4,50,000/- on account of the deficiency in services and unfair trade practice.
4. To pay Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.
5. Grant any other relief, which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of this case are that the husband of the complainant no.1- Kiran Chauhan and father of the complainants no.2 and 3-Pragati Chauhan and Mohit Chauhan and son of the complainant no.4-Sh.Jai Pal Singh Chauhan, namely Sh. Satish Kumar was an agriculturist and used to sow and reap the yields on 8 Acres of agricultural land.  This was the source of income of Sh. Satish Kumar from which he used to maintain his life alongwith his family members.  On 03.12.2020 at around 09:00 p.m., Satish Kumar (now deceased and hereinafter referred to as the patient only) felt discomfort in his chest and started vomiting at around 10:30 p.m. and was taken to the OPs, which is being run by OP No..2- Dr.Mrs.Sandeep Kaur Dhillon, M.D. (Gynae) for immediate first aid at 11:00 p.m.. After reaching the Onkar Hospital, OP No.1, one compounder met complainant no.4, to whom he disclosed the condition of the patient and asked him to call Doctor, OP No.2, who used to reside on the First Floor of the Hospital premises, but she instead of coming downstairs told the compounder over telephone to give 2 Injections to the patient. After giving 2 injections to the patient, the compounder again called OP No.2 and told her that the condition of the patient is not stable, but again she instead of coming downstairs further told the compounder to admit the patient at about 11:15 p.m. After admitting the patient, the compounder gave him Glucose with 1 and 2 more injections and on inquiry by the attendants- Satinder Singh (Brother) and complainant no.4, the compounder did not disclose the injection given to the patient  and assured that soon the patient would be relieved from pain and it is normal vomiting and chest pain. On hearing these words from the compounder, the attendants of the patient   asked the compounder that the patient is still having pain in chest and atleast his ECG be done to avoid any exigency and further asked the compounder to ask OP No.2 that if she had no experience in dealing with these type of patients she may refer to some higher hospital but to no avail.  The compounder then again called OP No.2 but she told him to tell the attendants that there will be no problem and he will be alright in 1-2 hours and further told that if the condition of the patient does not improve, then ECG will be done in the next morning and further told the compounder to convey to attendants not to make hue and cry that too in the midnight in her Hospital. At around 12:15 a.m. i.e. midnight of 03/04.12.2020 suddenly the patient cried because of lot of pain in his chest and again despite his deteriorating condition and repeated requests of the attendants of the patient neither the compounder called OP No.2 nor she came downstairs to see the patient during the entire treatment period. Only compounder was looking after the patient, but was unable to handle the condition and ultimately, the compounder told the attendants that the patient has expired. When the patient expired, the compounder informed OP No.2 regarding the death of the patient, OP No.2 came downstairs and confirmed the death of the patient and conveyed the complainants that the patient suffered Heart attack. Further despite all these negligent acts of OPs, body of the patient was released only after taking Rs.10,000/-. Complainant no.4 also lodged a complaint dated 12.03.2021 to The Chairman, National Medical Commission, New Delhi; The President, Ethics and Medical Registration Board, National Medical Commission, New Delhi and to the Chief Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Ambala City through registered A.D. post, qua deficiency in services, negligent in performing duties by the OPs.  After the receipt of the said complaint dated 12.03.2021 sent by registered A.D. post, complainant no.4, received a letter bearing No.019895 dated 07.09.2021 from the National Medical Commission Ethics and Medical Registration Board, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Phase-1, Dwarka to the effect that OP No.1 and 2 have sent their reply. Thereafter complainant No.4 received a notice dated 12.07.2021, from the office of registrar, Haryana, Medical Counsel, Sector-20, Panchkula, whereby complainants were asked to submit their complaint alongwith medical record. Accordingly, complainants submitted the complaint alongwith medical record but the Haryana Medical Counsel did not take any action against the OPs. There is medical negligence on the part of the OPs in treating the patient, hence, the present complaint.   
3.           Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written version and raised preliminary objections to the effect that the complaint is without any justification and the complainants have claimed an exorbitant amount of Rs.50 lakhs alongwith interest as compensation, more so when there is nothing on record to prove that there is any medical negligence;  no specific, scientific and justified allegations with regard to medical negligence or deficiency in providing services have been made by the complainants; the complainants have not come to this Commission with clean hands and have made an endeavor to suppress facts etc. On merits, it has been stated that OP No.2, Dr. Sandeep Kaur Dhillon is well qualified and experienced doctor. She has more than 20 years of experience in the field of medical profession. She is duly registered with the Medical Council India. She did her M.D. Physician six-year degree course in 1999.  On 03.12.2020 at around 11.30 PM, patient was brought to emergency of nursing home of OP No.1 with a complaint of vomiting, abdomen and epigastric pain and loose stool. He had a history of Alcoholism and had consumed country side alcohol, as told by the attendants. He was accompanied by his father Sh.Jai Pal Singh Chauhan and other family members. The paramedical Staff on reception told them that they deal emergencies related to Obstetrics/Gynecology cases and they should take the patient to Ambala to a higher Centre but they insisted on giving primary aid after which they would do the needful by taking him to Ambala. On receiving a call from staff, OP No.2 immediately came down to ground-floor of the hospital to give primary aid to the patient. Basic medical-aid in the form of injections, Emset for Nausea & Vomiting, Pantop for Acid Reflux and Ecobion capsule were given to the patient in accordance with the symptoms dictated by family members of the patient. At around 11:45 PM the patient's condition deteriorated showing symptoms of cardiac arrest. OP No.2 immediately performed Cardiac Pulmonary Resuscitation with lifesaving drugs from emergency reserve of the hospital and tried her best to revive the patient but could not succeed. The patient did not respond positively to CPR given and at 12:05 AM the patient could not be revived despite with best efforts and was declared dead. The OPs followed the standard protocol required to be followed while attending a patient in such an emergency to save the patient. The record/documents for information about the death of the patient were sent to the respective department. Only an amount of Rs.1000/-, was given at the time of start of treatment and no amount was charged or taken after the patient succumbed to death. The attendants were not willing to get post-mortem to know the cause of death of the patient for the reason best known to them and took the body home. The attendants of patient took pictures of treatment record on phone at the reception counter. However, the complainants filed similar complaint having absolutely same allegations of medical negligence before the statuary authority NMC, New Delhi and on their direction, HMC conducted investigations. The opinion by the Haryana Medical Council (the highest body of the state) about medical negligence in the present case as directed by the National Medical Council (a highest body of the country) was taken by the HMC in their meeting held on 22.09.2021 in the presence of both the parties i.e. complainants and OP No.1. After perusal of written statements of the parties and after thoroughly the examining the facts from the parties, the committee submitted its report as under:-

"CHARGES/ ALLEGATIONS MADE BY THE COMPLAINANTS DO NOT STAND THE GROUND REALITY AND NOTHING ADVERSE HAS BEEN FOUND AGAINST THE TREATING DOCTOR (DR.SANDEEP KAUR DHILLON)"

 

4.           This report was sent addressed to complainant No.4 in his name by the HMC vide their letter dated 20.01.2022 and the copies were sent/addressed to NMC as well as to the OPs by the Registrar, Haryana Medical Council, Panchkula, whereas the present complaint has been filed surreptitiously much after the receipt of the report from the HMC and that too without disclosing the material fact and the document.  Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with exemplary costs.
5.           Learned counsel for the complainants tendered affidavit of the complainant No.1, affidavit of Shri Sanjeev son of Shri Satpal Singh, r/o Village Bihta, Tehsil Saha District Ambala and affidavit of Chhote Khan son of Shri Muhav Khan, r/o Gauntra Patti, Narpat Khurd, Post Gauntra, Thana Usawan, Tehsil Dataganj, Budaun, Uttar Pardesh as Annexure CW1/A, CW2/A and CW3/A respectively alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-27 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainants. Learned counsel for the OPs tendered affidavit of Dr.Sandeep Kaur Dhillon, owner & Proprietor of Onkar Hospital, Shahabad Road, Saha, Ambala Cantt. as Annexure RW-1/A alongwith documents Annexure R-1, R1/A, R-2, R-3 & R-6 to R-8 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.         
6.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the case file.
7.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that it was on account of grave medical negligence on the part of the OPs and especially OP No.2 as she left the patient unattended which resulted into death of the patient. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment dated 03.01.2022 passed by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, in the case of Chandigarh Nursing Home and Anr. Versus Sukhdeep Kaur, Revision Petition No.4677 of 2013 and the judgment dated 24.07.2015, passed by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in the case of Ushendra and Ors. Versus Superintendent, Christian Medical College and Ors.
8.           On the contrary, learned counsel for the OPs submitted that the complainants have failed to prove that there is any medical negligence on the part of the OPs. He further submitted that though the OPs specifically told the complainants that only first aid can be given to the patient and that they should taken the patient to a higher Hospital/Centre, but they insisted to give first aid to him. However, since the patient condition deteriorated within few minutes due to consumption of country side alcohol as told by his attendants, as such, he succumbed to death. He further submitted that the complainants have concealed the report dated 24.01.2022, Annexure R-2, having been issued by the Registrar, Haryana Medical Council, whereby the OPs have been given clean chit by holding that charges/allegations made by the complainants against the treating doctor i.e. OP No.2 (Dr. Sandeep Kaur Dhillon) do not stand on the ground reality, as nothing adverse has been found against her. The learned counsel for the OP has placed reliance on the judgment dated 10.02.2010, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kusum Sharma Vs. Batra Hospital 2010(1) CPJ 29 (SC) and also on the judgment dated 20.11.2002, passed by the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi, in the case of Dr. Harkanwaljit Singh Vs. Gurbax Singh 2003 (1) CPJ 153 (NC).
9.           Perusal of treatment chart of the patient-Satish, Annexure C-6 reveals that that in the first instance, when he was brought to the OPs-Hospital on  03.12.2020 at 11.30 pm., his BP was checked and was noted down as 130/90; his pulse rate was 96 and oxygen level was 98%. However, unfortunately, the patient succumbed to death after some time, which as per the complainants happened on account of medical negligence on the part of the OPs. A such, the question which falls for consideration before this Commission is, as to whether, the complainants have been able to prove that there was any medical negligence on the part of the OPs, which resulted into death of the patient or not. It may be stated here that no evidence in the shape of report of any medical experts/Doctors has been placed on record by the complainants to prove that there was any medical negligence on the part of the OPs. On the other hand, the OPs have placed on record the report dated 24.01.2022, Annexure R-2, having been issued by the Registrar, Haryana Medical Council, relevant part of which is reproduced hereunder:-

“……In reference to the above noted subject, it is to bring under your kind notice that fact finding committee meeting was held on dated 22-09-2021 at 2.00 PM in the 0/o Haryana Medical Council. In which written statements of both the parties were taken by the committee. After thoroughly examined the facts of the complaint & written statements of both parties, Committee submitted the report on dated 22.09.2021. As per the committee report Charges/Allegations made by the complainant do not stand the ground reality and thing adverse has been found against the treating doctor (Dr. Sandeep Kaur Dhillon)".

In view of the above and as per the decision of the committee, this case has been led. This is for your kind information.

Registrar

Haryana Medical Council.…….”

 

10.           Bare perusal of the said report Annexure R-2 clearly reveals that it has been stated therein that Committee constituted in the matter has taken written statement of both the parties; thoroughly examined the facts of the complaint; and the said written statements were taken into consideration to come to conclusion that the charges/allegations made by the complainants against the treating doctor i.e. OP No.2 (Dr.Sandeep Kaur Dhillon) do not stand on the ground reality, as nothing adverse has been found against her.
11.           Significantly, the outcome of the above report dated 24.01.2022, Annexure R-2, was the result of the complaint having been lodged by complainant No.4 on 12.03.2021, to the Chairman and President of National Medical Commission, New Delhi and Chief Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Ambala City Annexure C-1.

It may be stated here that the complainants neither have placed on record the report dated 24.01.2022, furnished by the Registrar, Haryana Medical Counsel nor any document to prove thatthe said report, Annexure R-2 has been challenged by them nor have produced on record any contrary cogent and convincing evidence to rebut the said report. Thus, in the face of the opinion given by the Committee in the report dated 24.01.2022, Annexure R-2, referred to above, it can easily be said that there was no medical negligence on the part of the OPs.

12.           No doubt, to strengthen their case, the complainants have placed on record  medical record of some other persons namely Sanjeev and one Nahim Khan, Annexure C-13 and C-14 respectively, to prove that the OPs were also treating the patients with  various other diseases like Cardiac, Infertility, laparoscopy  etc. over and above the  treatment qua gynecology, in their hospital. It may be stated here that any third party evidence, which is not supported by the affidavits of the concerned persons cannot be taken into consideration, as such, this Commission is not bound to take into consideration the documents, Annexure C-9 to C-13 and Annexure C-14 to C-27. Even otherwise, if for the sake of arguments, it is considered that the OPs were also treating the patients with various other diseases like Cardiac, Infertility, laparoscopy etc. over and above the treatment qua gynecology, even then, from the said medical record Annexure C-9 to C-27, it is coming out that for other treatments like Cardiac, Dengu  etc. some specialists/Doctors like Dr.Divesh Bedi and others were called for treatment of the same and OP No.2 being Gynecologist was nowhere involved in treatment given to the patients names of which are mentioned in medical record Annexure C-9 to C-27 respectively.
13.           As far as reliance placed by the complainant on Chandigarh Nursing Home and Anr. Vs. Sukhdeep Kaur (Supra) decided by the Hon’ble National Commission is concerned, it may be stated here that the fact of this case are totally different because it is a case of wrong referral of patient to physician instead of skin specialist. In Ushendra and Ors. Vs. Superintendent Christian Medical College and others, (Supra) decided by the Hon’ble National Commission, the patient died of Cardiac Respiratory Arrest because no immediate action and treatment was given to the patient. Even his blood pressure was not noted down. Whereas, in the present case, the complainants have failed to establish any evidence to prove that no immediate action was taken by the Ops when the patient was brought to their hospital. As such, reliance placed by the complainant on these cases is misplaced, as far as the present case is concerned.
14.           In this view of the matter, it is held that since the complainants have failed to prove their case, as such, no relief can be granted to them. Resultantly, this complaint stands dismissed with no order as to cost. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced:- 15.03.2023.

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President