Order No. 24 dt. 20/04/2018
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is a senior citizen in the early part of November,2013 the complainant felt painless swelling in the region of upper left neck. The complainant consulted Dr A K Sinha, who advised him for having some tests including FNAC. The complainant thereafter met another doctor who also advised the same test. Accordingly the complainant went for the test to be conducted by the o.p. laboratory. The test was conducted by the o.p. laboratory and the reports stated that cervical lymph node-suggestive of Hodgekin’s Lymphoma(left). The complainant thereafter visited the chamber of Dr Anupam Biswas who after perusal of the report suggested the complainant for the treatment of the said lymph to an oncologist Dr Chanchal Goswami because of such referring to the doctor for treatment of cancer the complainant became perturbed. Thereafter the complainant faced psychological problem and had to consult different doctors including Dr Uday Chowdhury, Dr D P Banerjee and Dr S N Datta. The complainant also visited the chamber of another Dr Chanchal Goswami, Oncologist who advised the complainant for further test. Ultimately the complainant was treated by Dr Kedia who also suggested for undergoing chemo therapy. The complainant thereafter on the advice of some well wishers and friends visited Tata Memorial Centre and Tata Medical Centre after scrutinizing the reports and also biopsy specimen tested at Tata showed negative result. The complainant had to bear huge expenditure for undergoing such test. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps for providing of Rs.2,65,955/- as compensation and litigation cost of Rs.25,000/-.
O.ps contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the patient was treated by different doctors and it is not possible for this Forum to determine the wrong assessment of the test reports without having any report from medical expert. The o.ps admitted that Fine Needle Aspiration (FNAC) was done from left cervical lymph node. The FNAC is a diagnostic procedure used to investigate lumps or masses. In this technique thin hollow needle is inserted into the mass for sampling of cells and after that the same is examined under a microscope or histological tissues specimen evaluation. A needle aspiration biopsy is safer and less traumatic than an open surgical biopsy. After examination it was found that there was reactive lymphoid background, a polymorphic background comprising of eosinophils and plasma cells. Presence of these cells with polymorphic background in an elderly male with painless hard cervical lymph nodes in sixth decade of life is very suspicious. On the basis of the said fact the o.ps did not give any definitive diagnosis. A suggestion of possibility of Hodgekin’s Lymphoma was offered. This was immediately followed with a definite advice of excision and histology for categorization and confirmation. The reports submitted by the complainant in respect of the observation of Tata Cancer Hospital was similar than that of the report prepared by the o.ps.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided:-
- Whether the report prepared by the o.ps suggested of any cancer of the said patient?
- Was the report prepared by the o.ps same than that of the report prepared by Tata Cancer Hospital?
- Was there any deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant is a senior citizen in the early part of November,2013 the complainant felt painless swelling in the region of upper left neck. The complainant consulted Dr A K Sinha, who advised him for having some tests including FNAC. The complainant thereafter met another doctor who also advised the same test. Accordingly the complainant went for the test to be conducted by the o.p. laboratory. The test was conducted by the o.p. laboratory and the reports stated that cervical lymph node-suggestive of Hodgekin’s Lymphoma(left). The complainant thereafter visited the chamber of Dr Anupam Biswas who after perusal of the report suggested the complainant for the treatment of the said lymph to an oncologist Dr Chanchal Goswami because of such referring to the doctor for treatment of cancer the complainant became perturbed. Thereafter the complainant faced psychological problem and had to consult different doctors including Dr Uday Chowdhury, Dr D P Banerjee and Dr S N Datta. The complainant also visited the chamber of another Dr Chanchal Goswami, Oncologist who advised the complainant for further test. Ultimately the complainant was treated by Dr Kedia who also suggested for undergoing chemo therapy. The complainant thereafter on the advice of some well wishers and friends visited Tata Memorial Centre and Tata Medical Centre after scrutinizing the reports and also biopsy specimen tested at Tata showed negative result. The complainant had to bear huge expenditure for undergoing such test. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps for providing of Rs.2,65,955/- as compensation and litigation cost of Rs.25,000/-.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.p.s argued that the patient was treated by different doctors and it is not possible for this Forum to determine the wrong assessment of the test reports without having any report from medical expert. The o.ps admitted that Fine Needle Aspiration (FNAC) was done from left cervical lymph node. The FNAC is a diagnostic procedure used to investigate lumps or masses. In this technique thin hollow needle is inserted into the mass for sampling of cells and after that the same is examined under a microscope or histological tissues specimen evaluation. A needle aspiration biopsy is safer and less traumatic than an open surgical biopsy. After examination it was found that there was reactive lymphoid background, a polymorphic background comprising of eosinophils and plasma cells. Presence of these cells with polymorphic background in an elderly male with painless hard cervical lymph nodes in sixth decade of life is very suspicious. On the basis of the said fact the o.ps did not give any definitive diagnosis. A suggestion of possibility of Hodgekin’s Lymphoma was offered. This was immediately followed with a definite advice of excision and histology for categorization and confirmation. The reports submitted by the complainant in respect of the observation of Tata Cancer Hospital was similar than that of the report prepared by the o.ps.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant had the problem of painless swelling in the region of his upper left neck. In spite of availing the medical treatment the complainant did not get proper relief for which the complainant consulted ENT expert Dr Anupam Biswas who suggested the complainant for undergoing FNAC test The complainant thereafter consulted another oncologist Dr Chanchal Goswami who endorsed the test suggested by Dr Anupam Biswas. Accordingly the complainant in order to have the proper evaluation of test went to o.ps for undergoing test. The test report suggested as alleged by the complainant that there was cancer of cervical lymph node left. After coming to know of the outcome of such report the complainant became disappointed and he faced psychological problems for which he had to consult psychiatrist Because of such problems the complainant had to bear huge expenses ultimately he went to Tata Cancer Hospital whereby test was made and the report suggested that the complainant did not have any cancerous growth in the said portion of the left neck. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case. It appears from the report filed by the complainant and the test was made with the o.p. of FNAC and the report stated that smears are very cellular and show a reactive lymphoid background with excess of eosinophils and plasma cells. The Ld lawyer for the o.ps emphasized that the reports collected from Tata Medical Centre after undergoing such test by the complainant is same than that of the report prepared by the o.ps. On perusal of the medical literature filed by the o.ps also corroborated the proper evaluation made by the o.ps. The terms used in the medical report of the o.ps are similar than that of the terms used by Tata Medical Centre. Only minor difference between the two reports are that the report prepared by the o.ps mentioned the medical term but the report prepared by Tata Medical Centre had only elaborately discussed the medical term. In view of such facts and circumstances we hold that the report prepared by the o.ps was similar than that of the report prepared by the Tata Medical Centre. Therefore we hold that the case filed by the complainant has got no merit and the complainant will not be entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is ordered,
that the case no.423/2015 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps.
