Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/94/2015

M/s.D.Sounder Raj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dr.V.Thirupathi Raja - Opp.Party(s)

R.Narendiran-com

27 Apr 2018

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  29.05.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  27.04.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

        PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

              THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L.,      MEMBER - I

 

FRIDAY THE 27^th DAY OF APRIL 2018

 

C.C.NO.94/2015

 

 

D.Sounder Raj,

S/o Devaraj,

No.122, M.P.M.Street,

Sanjai Nagar,

Vysarpadi, Chennai – 39.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

Dr.V.Thirupathi Raja,

Sri Vignesh Clinic,

No.83, Muthu Mudali Street,

Vyasarpadi, Chennai – 39.

.....Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                 : 15.06.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.R.Narendran & E.Vijay

 

Counsel for Opposite Party                      : Dr.B.Cheran & M.Nagarethinam

 

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

This complaint is filed by the complainant  to direct the opposite party to pay compensation for pain and sufferings and deficiency in service, mental agony caused to the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- spent for the operation and medicine with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant took his son Akash aged about 10 years to the opposite party clinic on 28.11.2014 to treat him for swelling and pain in his testicles. After examination, the opposite party doctor prescribed medicine and advised to bring his son for four days continuously. Even after four days the pain and swelling was not deduced. The complainant took his son to the Government Stanley Hospital on 03.12.2014 for treatment. After check-up, the doctor advised that his son needs surgery and he was not treated properly and if surgery not done there was every possibility of loss of life. Fearing the same, the complainant taken his son to Antony’s Hospital, Madhavaram, Chennai on 04.12.2014 for treatment. The doctor there also told the same as told in the Government Stanley Hospital. The complainant next had taken his son to the Julian Nursing Home, Perambur, Chennai. They also informed that his son was not given proper treatment by the opposite party and he may collapse any time.

2. The complainant left with no other option, on 04.12.2014 he admitted his son in the Julian Nursing Home and they diagnosed ‘Torsion right testis with Gangrene’ due to which pain and swelling of right side of scrotum for five days. After surgery he was discharged on 05.12.2014 and advised to visit every day to clean the wound. This fact was brought to the knowledge of the opposite party and he assured to take care of the expenses to be incurred for the operation. As advised the complainant gave a photo copy of the letter on 09.12.2014 to the opposite party.  However, the opposite party refused to part with the fees and charges paid due to the wrong diagnoses and wrong medication caused by the careless and negligent act of him. The opposite party suppressed the wrong treatment given to the complainant and the same was forced to undergo surgery by spending huge sum by the complainant. The doctors also informed that there is a possibility of removing the testicles, his son may not able to involve in sexual activities and cannot lead normal matrimonial life. The complainant so for spent Rs.50,000/- due to wrong diagnoses and treatment for the opposite party. Hence the complainant issued legal notice to the opposite party. Thereafter, he filed this complaint to direct the opposite party to pay compensation for pain and sufferings and deficiency in service, mental agony caused to the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- spent for the operation and medicine with cost of the complaint.      

3. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

The opposite party admits that the complainant brought his son to the clinic on 28.11.2014 for abdominal pain and swelling scrotum. The child was not having pain on 28.11.2014 but developed on 30.11.2014. If the child was having severe pain, he could not have tolerated from 30.11.2014 to 04.12.2014 i.e for five days.

4.  The opposite party doctor prescribed Dicyclomine for pain, Moxikind an antibiotic for infection and inflammation, B-complex and Antacid were given in addition. The opposite party gave a reference letter to Government Stanley Hospital for further treatment. The child did not attend the opposite party all the four days and came back only on 30.11.2014. Further the complainant replied that there was an improvement in relation to pain and swelling and hence he did not go to Stanley Hospital. Further the child developed common cold and he prescribed medicines for the same. 

5. The diagnosis of Torsion Right Testis may be correct. The child could not have developed Torsion testis on 28.11.2014 or 30.11.2014 because, the pain is unbearable and the child cannot tolerate it for five days. Secondly, torsion testis is an emergency condition within 4 to 6 hours, it has to be attended. If not, the testis would be permanently damaged and it had to be removed. The very fact that, the tests were done, show that the complication had started within a day of admission into Julian Nursing Home on 04.12.2014 i.e., the complication had arisen only on 03.12.2014, the day the child was taken to Stanley Hospital. The torsion pain had started only then. Because of the development of complication, the complainant had taken the child to Stanley Hospital on 03.12.2014 and not before. The Torsion of testis is nothing but testis encircling around the spermatic cord. That can happen any time and in this case, it had happened on 03.12.2014. The complainant had spent only Rs.22,195/- totally. That expenditure has resulted because of the disease process; the child had developed on its own. The child is doing well now. He has no problem whatsoever. If at all there was any suffering on the part of the child, it was due to the delay exhibited by the complainant.   The opposite party had given correct treatment on both the occasions. The complications had developed only after 30.11.2014, as explained above. This opposite party has not committed any negligent act and hence no cause of action arose to the complaint and prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.

 

6. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

7. POINT NO :1 

          The admitted facts are that the  complainant took his son Akash aged about 10 years to the opposite party clinic on 28.11.2014  for treatment of  swelling and pain in his testicles and  after examination the opposite party/doctor prescribed medicine in Ex.A1 prescription and again the complainant went with his son on 30.11.2014 and on that day also the  opposite party gave Ex.A2 prescription with medicines and the 2^nd opposite party advised the complainant to go to Stanley Hospital for further treatment and accordingly the complainant also went to the Stanley Hospital as per Ex.A3  and thereafter the complainant admitted his son on 04.12.2014 and surgery was done to him and discharged on 05.12.2014 and the discharge summary issued by the Julian Hospital is marked as Ex.A6 and the bills, prescription  issued by the said hospital are marked as Ex.A7 & Ex.A8. 

          8. The complainant would argue that even after four days under the care of the opposite party from 28.11.2014 the swelling and pain in the testis have not been reduced and hence he went to the Stanley Hospital on 03.12.2014, then Antony Hospital, Madhavaram, Chennai on 04.12.2014 and on the same day went to Julian Nursing Home, Perambur and in all the three hospital the doctors have said the opposite party doctor have not properly diagnosed and prescribed medicines and however the doctor at Julian Nursing Home diagnosed as torsion right testis with Gangrene due to which pain and swelling on the right side of scrotum for five days and after surgery he went to the hospital everyday to clean the wound and these facts proves that  the opposite party has not diagnosed the disease properly and no proper medicine was prescribed by the opposite party and therefore the opposite party has committed the deficiency in service.

          9. The complainant filed Ex.A3 attender card issued to the patient Akash in the Government Stanley Hospital. However, what was the treatment given in the said hospital no supporting documents filed by the complainant. Further there is no evidence available to establish that the doctor in the Stanley had said that the opposite party has not properly diagnosed and given treatment to Akash.  Further no documents filed that the complainant son taken treatment at Antony’s Hospital Madhavaram. Therefore, it is held that the complainant has not proved that the doctors at Stanley Hsopital and Antony’s Hospital told him that the opposite party doctor has diagnosed and treated improperly and committed deficiency.

10. Admittedly the complainant son Akash admitted in the Julian Hospital on 04.12.2014 and diagnosed as Torsion Right Testis with Gangrene and the patient complained pain and swelling of right side of scrotum for 5 days. Finally, the opposite party seen the patient on 30.11.2014 and thereafter he did not turn up. Further the opposite parties himself advised to take further treatment at Stanley Hospital and this fact was not denied by the complainant. If the patient is suffering with severe pain from 30.11.2014 onwards, the patient ought not to have tolerated the pain. After 30.11.2014, the patient was taken to the hospital only on 03.12.2014 shows, during the interregnum period the patient was not suffering much pain and that is why the complainant had not taken the child to the hospital.

11. There is no evidence or nexus to establish that due to wrong diagnosis gangrene was formed to the patient.  The opposite party prescribed medicines in Ex.A1, Ex.A2.  Absolutely no evidence is available on behalf of the complainant that how those medicines are irrelevant or caused damage and leads to formation of gangrene to the patient. According to the opposite party he had given tablets to relieve the pain. The medicines given by the opposite party doctor and not diagnosed properly can be spoken only by an expert viz., doctor. The consequences of medicine prescribed by the opposite party can be spoken only by an expert. The complainant is not a competent person to speak that the opposite party prescribed wrong medicines without expert evidence. Further even the documents filed by the complainant do not establish the alleged negligent act of the opposite party. Therefore, we hold that the complainant has not proved any deficiency committed by the opposite party and hence, it is held that the opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service.    

12. POINT NO:2

Since the Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 27^th day of April 2018.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 28.11.2014 Prescription issued by the opposite party   Ex.A2 dated 30.11.2014 Prescription issued by the opposite party     Ex.A3 dated 03.12.2014 Patient attendor identity card    Ex.A4 dated 04.12.2014 Medical report of Julian Hospital   Ex.A5 dated 05.12.2014 Surgery report issued by Julian Hospital   Ex.A6 dated 05.12.2014 Discharge Summary issued by Julian Hospital     Ex.A7 dated 05.12.2014 Bill issued by Julian Hospital   Ex.A8 dated 04.12.2014                  to 18.03.2015   Prescription given by Julian Hospital Ex.A9 dated 10.12.2014                  to 17.12.2014   Bill issued by the pharmacy Ex.A10 dated 02.01.2015 Lawyers notice issued on behalf on complainant   Ex.A11 dated 13.01.2015 Letter sent by the opposite party   Ex.A12 dated 31.01.2015 Reply notice sent by the opposite party   Ex.A13 dated 21.02.2015 Complaint to Medical council sent by complainant   Ex.A14 dated 23.03.2015 Acknowledgement letter sent by TN Medical Council   Ex.A15 dated 20.04.2015 Reminder sent to TN Medical Council sent by the complainant   Ex.A16 dated 13.05.2015 Acknowledgement letter sent by TN Medical Council

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

Ex.B1 dated NIL                     Copy of CSR issued by P3 Police Station                                        

 

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT