Haryana

Sonipat

538/2012

BEDO DEVI - Complainant(s)

Versus

DR.RAMESH SEHGAL - Opp.Party(s)

29 Jul 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

 

                                     Complaint No.538 of 2012

Instituted on: 25.10.2014                    

Date of order: 05.08.2015

 

 

Smt. Bedo Devi wife of Hoshiar Singh, resident of village Anandpur Jharoth, tehsil Kharkhoda, distt. Sonepat.

 

…Complainant.          Versus

1.Dr Ramesh Sehgal, Nav Jiwan Hospital, Near Kalupur Chungi, Sonepat.

2.Nav Jiwan Hospital, near Kalupur Chungi, Sonepat.

3.Dr. Jetender Rathod r/o 15/4 Acacia Vatika City, Sector 49, Sohna road, Gurgaon.

4.The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., A-25/27, Asaf Ali road, New Delhi.

5.National Insurance Co. Ltd. 3, Middleton Street, PB No.9229, Kolkata-700071.

 

                                                                                                …Respondents.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Shri SK Kaushik, Adv. for complainant.

           Shri Umesh Dahra Advocate for respondent no.1 to 3.

           Shri Sushil Kumar Adv. for respondent no.4.

           Shri LK Doda, Adv. for respondent no.5.

 

Before-    Nagender Singh-President.

          Prabha Wati-Member.

           D.V. Rathi-Member.

 

O R D E R

 

         Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.7,50,000/- from the respondents alongwith interest etc. on the ground that the respondent is not a trained doctor to give/refer allopathic medicines and perform surgical operations  and he wrongly & unfairly  diagnosed the complainant. The respondent remained negligent in treating the complainant in toto. The respondent did not even satisfy herself that the surgical operation was must to provide relief to the complainant.  The pancereatic abcess was evident as a result of pancreatic injury during surgery.  The complainant was not informed about the damage caused to body of pancreas and due to this, unbearable pain was suffered by the complainant. The complainant consulted various doctor. The complainant was admitted in Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital Delhi for her treatment and has spent more-than Rs.5 lacs in treatment.  Due to the treatment provided by the respondent negligently, the complainant is unable to do hard work for whole his life and this all has happened due to wrong treatment given by the respondent. So, she has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       In reply, the respondent no.1 and 2 have submitted that they had only attended the complainant in OPD and they did not perform any surgery on the person of the complainant. After going through the reports, the respondent no.1 advised surgery on the right kidney of the complainant and told her and her attendant that surgery will be conducted by Urologist Dr Jetender Rathoda and his team. The respondent no.1 advised the complainant prescribed tests for her pre-operative assessment regarding fitness for surgery and these tests/investigation were made at respondent no.2 hospital on 29.8.2012.  Infact Dr Jetender  Rathod and his team performed the surgery on the person of the complainant.  During the period of treatment, the respondent sent the calculus/stone in right kidney of the complainant. The respondent no.1 and 2 have denied the fact that they wrongly and unfairly diagnosed the complainant.  False and baseless allegations have been leveled by the complainant against the respondent no.1 and 2.  The complainant was treated in a very well mannered and the complainant has not suffered any mental agony, harassment at the hands of the respondent no.1 and 2 and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

         The respondent no.3 in his reply has submitted that the respondent no.3 and his team performed the surgery on the person of the complainant on 29.8.2012. The surgery was uneventful and the complainant was discharged on 1.9.2012. The respondent no.3 has denied the fact that during unwanted surgery of the complainant, the body of pancreas damaged or the complainant felt considerable pain and inconvenience or anxiety all due to any deficiency in service of the respondent no.3. The reports/opinions filed by the complainant alongwith complaint shows that no pancreas was damaged. The complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint against the respondent no.3 and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

         Respondent no.4 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. has submitted that the complainant has filed the present complaint only to harass and extort the money from the respondent no.4.

         Respondent no.5 National Insurance Co. Ltd. has submitted that as pancreas was not damaged, the question of abscess in pancreas does not arise. The respondent no.3 performed his duty diligently as per medical norm and it cannot be said that there was any kind of negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.3 while treating the complainant.

3.       We have heard the arguments advanced by  the learned counsel for the parties at length.  All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.  

         In the present case, ld. Counsel for the complainant has filed an application for referring the matter to PGI Khanpur for expert opinion. Vide order dated 16.2.2015, Director PGI Khanpur was requested to constitute the medical board of doctors specialists in the field and was further requested to examine the complainant and to submit the report whether there is any negligent or deficiency in service on the part of the respondents or not?

         The Director BPS GMC for Women, Khanpur Kalan, Sonepat has sent the report vide letter no.1788 dated 10.4.2015 which was received in this Forum vide diary no.113 dated 21.4.2015. The relevant portion of the report is reproduced below:-

         “The Board Members met on 10.4.2015 in the office of the Medical Superintendent. After hearing both the parties and perusing the available record with them, the board is of the considered opinion that there was no lack of reasonable care and skill or willful negligence on the part of the treating doctor/surgeon”.

         Meaning thereby, there is negligence on the part of the treating doctor/surgeon, but the same is not willful.

         Now the main question arises for consideration before this Forum is that whether the complainant is entitled for any kind of relief against the respondents and if so, who is liable to pay the amount of compensation to the respondents?

         The respondent no.1 Dr Ramesh Sehgal in his affidavit has deposed that he advised surgery on the right kidney of the complainant and told her & her attendant that surgery will be conducted by visiting consultant Urologist Dr Jetender Rathod and his team.  Dr Jetender Rathod and his team performed surgery on the person of the complainant.  Thus, in our view, it is Dr Jetender Rathod/respondent no.3 who is liable for rendering deficient and negligent services to the complainant while conducting her surgery as the complainant did not find any relief in pain even after surgery and due to the surgery conducted by the respondent no.3, the body of pancreas was damaged and that amounts to a negligence in service on the part of the respondent no.3 and thus, he is liable to compensate the complainant.  The respondent no.3 Dr Jetender Rathod is insured with respondent no.5 National Insurance Company Ltd.  So, we direct the respondent no.5 National Insurance Co. Ltd. to pay compensation on behalf of respondent no.3,  lumpsum to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs.five lacs) to the complainant for performing her surgery in a negligent manner, for rendering deficient services, for harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed qua respondent no.3 and 5.

         Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

         File be consigned after due compliance.

 

 

(Prabha Wati) (DV Rathi)            (Nagender Singh)           

Member,DCDRF, Member, DCDRF           President, DCDRF

Sonepat.      Sonepat.                Sonepat.

 

Announced 05.08.2015