By. Smt. Bindu. R, President:
This complaint is filed by Sajeesh Kumar, Perumbilavil House, Kunnathidavaka, Vythiri Post, Wayanad against the Managing Director, Fatima Mata Mission Hospital, Kalpetta alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of the Opposite Party.
2. The allegation in the complaint is that one year back, mother of the Complainant aged 72 years was treated in the Opposite Party hospital for low oxygen level and low sodium level. Complainant states that it was informed from the Opposite Party hospital that the issue was related to the Covid 19 affected to her and hence the treatment was continuing in the Opposite Party Hospital. The Complainant alleged that on 24.03.2022 Dr. Sebastian in the Opposite Party’s hospital was consulted and SYP BETONIN 5ML BD-1 Bottle was prescribed even though by outside prescription, directed the pharmacy of the Opposite Party institution to give the said medicine. Hence the Complainant purchased the medicine on 24.03.2022 as per Bill No.106229 by paying the value of the medicine.
3. Complainant states that the medicine given to his mother was used for one month but she was affected with tiredness and difficulty to walk. Complainant states that when he approached a private medical shop it was informed that the medicine was not using for BP but for extending the menstrual period and hence the medicine was stopped. Further enquiry revealed that the medicine given from pharmacy of Opposite Party Hospital on 24.03.2022 was not written by the Doctor but it was ARISTOZYME LIQUID 200ML and NORENT TAB. According to the Complainant, the pharmacy of the Opposite Party Hospital had given a wrong medicine on 24.03.2022 which is not prescribed by the Doctor.
4. The Complainant states that due to the further illness of the mother of the Complainant she had to consult the Doctor in Government Hospital Vythiri and referred to Calicut medical College and she died on 10.05.2022 at Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode.
5. Complainant alleges that the incident happened only due to the carelessness of the Opposite Party hospital authorities which amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from their side and hence the Complainant approached the Commission praying for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and for other reliefs.
6. Upon notice, Opposite Party appeared and filed their written version denying the allegation in the complaint. The Opposite Party admitted the fact that Karthiyani, aged 72 was under IP treatment under care of Pulmonologist Dr. Tina Annama from 28.01.2022 to 04.02.2022 for the diagnosed condition of acute exacerbation of COPD with type II respiratory failure, severe PAH mid/moderate MR/TR, MVP with concentric LVH, systematic hypertension dys-electrolytemia (corrected and cervical spondylosis left upper limb/paresis. She had cough with breathing difficulty since one month, orthopnea for five months and decreased food intake since one month. She have history of Covid in April 2021 (Category A). The treatment history shows that the patient was suffering from various systemic illnesses with co-morbidities. The Opposite Party contented that it is only a cooked up story for undue advantage and the doctors attached to the Opposite Party had not given any prescription of medicine for one month as claimed by the Complainant and if the patient had any complaint after taking medicines it is to be reported to the treating doctor which is not done in this case as per review advice. On 24.03.2022 the patient was given Aristozyme liquid 200ml and tab Noren from the Hospital Pharmacy. Tab Noren was given only 10 numbers for 5 days which will not cause any adverse side effect leading to death. According to the Opposite Party, there was no direction from the Doctors to continue the prescribed medicines for any further period than he advised or any further dosage over and above the prescribed quantity. The allegation that the pharmacy carelessly issued wrong medicine is also denied by the Opposite Party. It is also contented in the version that Noren for 5 days would not cause any health hazards or adverse side effect causing death and hence no damage had been caused to the patient by giving Tab Noren from the pharmacy. After 24.03.2022 the patient did not turn up and lost further follow up and according to the Opposite Party it is highly improbable that the patient had increased physical ailments after taking medicines as she had been suffering from various systemic illness as diagnosed previously and the short course of medicines given from the Opposite Party’s pharmacy will not cause death and the death of the patient on 10.05.2022 at Medical College Hospital cannot be correlated with the intake of medicines given from the Opposite Party’s pharmacy. The alleged deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party is denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
7. Evidence in this case consists of the chief affidavit of the Complainant and Exts.A1 to A4 from the side of the Complainant. The Opposite Party has not turned up when the case was taken for evidence and not even represented by the Counsel after filing version.
8. Heard the Counsel for the Complainant.
9. The following are the questions to be analyzed by the Commission to derive into an inference of the fact.
- Whether there is any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from the side of the Opposite Party…?
- If proved compensation and costs to be awarded in the case..?
10. Considered the matter in detail and perused the records. In this case the case of the Complainant is that wrong medicine was given from the pharmacy of the Opposite Party Hospital and thereby caused difficulties to the mother of the Complainant. To prove the case of the Complainant he had produced Ext.A1 to A4. As per Ext.A2 Aristozyme and Norten 10 mg was adviced by Dr. Sebastian. V. J on 24.03.2022. As per Ext.A4 Syp Betonin 5ml BD-1 bottle are seen prescribed on 24.03.2022 as outside prescription by Dr. Tina Annama Sakariah. But as per Ext.A3 bill, the medicines given as per Bill No.106229 dated 24.03.2022 are 1). Aristozyme Liquid 200 ml and 2) Noren Tab from the pharmacy of Opposite Party Hospital on payment of Rs.170.95/-. There is no evidence to show that the medicine Betonin 5ml BD1 which is prescribed as outside prescription is given from the pharmacy of Opposite Party Hospital.
11. On the other hand, apart from filing version, the Opposite Party had not entered in to the box to disprove the contentions of the Complainant. In the version of Opposite Party, the Opposite Party stated in para 8 “There was no willful act or omission from the part of the pharmacy staff in issuing medicines as per prescription and in any case death will not be caused by intake of Tab Noren for 5 days BD”.
12. The Commission has made a very thorough probe into the overall aspects of the complaint and derived into the following observations. This is a case of medical negligence and therefore to fix the liability and burden on the Doctor or the hospital is to be made with utmost care and only on finding that the real cause of causality is due to the deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from their side. This has been upheld by the Apex Court on many occasions and even guidelines were also issued from higher judiciary. Here in this case the Complainant had produced merely three documentary evidences and is stating that the death of the mother of the Complainant is due to the intake of a wrong medicine prescribed by Opposite Party or given from their pharmacy. The Complainant has not produced any medical records to prove the authenticity of the claim that the death of the mother of the Complainant is caused due to the intake of wrong medicine. The Complainant states that his mother was taken to medical college Hospital, Kozhikode where she died on 10.05.2022. He has not produced the Death Certificate of his mother or the case history of that hospital where there is recording in the Death Certificate or in the case history, the real reason for death. Moreover and above that the Commission cannot conclude and reach in to the reason as stated by the Complainant without evidences for the same. At least the Complainant would have moved the Commission to examine a qualified Medical Expert to give a report to the effect that the death caused to the mother of the Complainant was due to the intake of wrong medicine given by the Opposite Party. It is possible to an Expert Physician to find out even from the medical records issued from both the hospitals. The Opposite Party had not made their appearance after filing version and contested the case. Even though it is a very serious lapse, due to the above reasons stated, the Commission cannot initiate action against the Opposite Party merely due to their absence. Since there is lack of evidence on the part of the Complainant under circumstances described above the Commission observed that the Complainant had not proved that the reason for death of his mother who is aged 72 years is due to the intake of wrong medicine given by the Opposite Party and hence Point No.1 is found against the Complainant and therefore we have not analyzed Point No.2.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 8th day of February 2024.
Date of Filing:-20.07.2022.
PRESIDENT : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
APPENDIX.
Witness for the Complainant:-
PW1. Sajish Kumar. P. B. Sub Engineer.
Witness for the Opposite Party:-
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:-
A1. Copy of Procedure Form. Dt:08.02.2022 and
24.03.2022.
A2. Copy of Medicine Bill Cash. Dt:24.03.2022.
A3. Copy of Registration Bill (Cash). Dt:24.03.2022.
A4. Copy of Prescription. Dt:24.03.2022.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-
Nil.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CDRC, WAYANAD.
Kv/-
