Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/27/2014

M.Sunder - Complainant(s)

Versus

M.Sivakumar, Laksha Hospital & 2 others - Opp.Party(s)

X. Selvam Sundar

23 Apr 2015

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present:   THIRU.J.JAYARAM,                    PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER.

                   TMT.P.BAKIAVATHY,                   MEMBER.

 

 

C.C.No.27/2014

 

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF APRIL 2015.

 

 

M. Sunder

S/o. V. Mani,

No.91, Godavari Street,

Anna Nagar,

Tharamani,Chennai.                                        Complainant

 

Vs

 

1.  Dr. M. Siva Kumar,

     Director,

     M/s. Laksha Hospitals,

     No.15, P.S. SivasamySalai,

     Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.

 

2.  Dr. T. Senthil Kumar, M.D.,

     Consultant Doctor,

     M/s. Laksha Hospitals,

     No.15, P.S. SivasamySalai,

     Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.

 

3.   M/s. Laksha Hospitals,

      Represented by its managing Director,

      No.15, P.S. SivasamySalai,

      Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.                       Opposite Parties

 

 

Counsel for Complainant                  :  M/s. X. Selvam Sounder, Advocate.

Counsel for Opposite Parties             :  Served. Called absent.

                   This complaint coming before us for final hearing on 06-02-2015 and on hearing the arguments of the complainant and upon perusing the material records, this Commission made the following:

ORDER

 

THIRU. J. JAYARAM, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER.

 

1.                The case of the complainant as per the amended complaint is as follows:- 

                   On 31.05.2008 the complainant fell down from the tree at his residence and sustained injuries in his spinal cord and he was taken to Ramachandra Medical Center at Porur where he underwent an operation for fracture at T12 Level at spinal cord and had treatment for 2 months in the above hospital and on 05.07.2008 he was discharged. Even after the treatment at the above hospital he had no sensation below his hip and no Urinal Bladder Control and he was totally bedridden.

2.                Later the complainant approached MIOT Hospitals, at Chennai and he was admitted there and he was under the treatment of Professor Dr.P.V.A. Mohandoss and the complainant were further seen by Plastic Surgeon, Spinal Surgeon, Neuro Physician and other specialists of the above hospital and on 07.08.2008 he was discharged. He was advised to undergo physio therapy treatment regularly and he took physio therapy treatment for 8 months after the discharge and as a result of the physio therapy treatment the complainant regained urinal bladder control and he was able to walk with the support of caliber and walker.

3.                During the month of January 2011 he saw a medical program advertisement in a T.V. given by one Laksha hospital/ the 3^rd opposite party and through the advertisement he came to know that this hospital has given stem cell treatment for acute and severe diseases such as Eye problem, Bone fractures, spinal cord problems etc.,and assured full recovery from the above ailment and offered to give stem cell treatment free of cost. Hence the complainant approached the 3^rd opposite party hospital and there he met the 2^nd opposite party by name Dr.Senthil Kumar who advised the complainant to undergo the three stem cell surgeries treatment and further the 2^nd opposite party assured the complainant that he will recover from all his spinal cord ailments after the stem cell treatment, and the 2^nd opposite party also represented that the 1^st level of stem cell surgery was for formal checking for any side effects and any other issues. The 2^nd opposite party conducted 1^st stem cell surgery on 26.04.2011 at 3^rd opposite party hospital and the 3^rd opposite party collected Rs.12,500/- from the complainant.

4.                The 2^nd stem cell surgery was conducted by the 2^nd opposite party in the 3^rd opposite party hospital on 14.11.2011 and the 3^rd opposite party collected Rs.70,000/- from the complainant after a day from the 2^nd stem cell surgery and the complainant experienced burning sensation in his throat and severe pain in his lungs. The 3^rd stem cell was conducted by the 2^nd opposite party on 23.12.2011 at the 3^rd opposite party hospital they collected Rs.35,000/- from the complainant.

5.                Having no improvement the complainant reported the same to both 1^st and the 2^nd opposite parties and to the complainant’s surprise, both  1^st and the 2^nd opposite parties advised to undergo the 4^th stem cell surgery free of cost and hence the 4^th stem cell surgery was done at the 3^rd opposite party hospital on 26.05.2012 and after 15 minutes from the treatment the complainant felt severe pain at his hip and at his lower abdomen and after the 4^th stem cell surgery again he lost his urinal bladder control and sensation and also did not recover from the spinal cord problems at all.

6.                The 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties asked the complainant to come to Hotel Savera without informing the purpose on some medical grounds and on going there the complainant was shocked and surprised that the 1^st opposite party had arranged for press meet at M/s. Hotel Savera and the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties had displayed to the media people stating that the complainant has fully recovered from the urinal bladder control problem and the spinal cord problems due to the treatment given by the opposite parties and thus the 1^st and the 2^nd opposite parties have misused the complainant for their 3^rd opposite party hospital’s marketing purposes. As per the law the act of the opposite parties misusing the patients for the hospital’s marketing purposes without the knowledge and consent of the complainant is a clear case of unfair trade practice which against the law of the land.

7.                He has spent more than Rs.1,17,500/- for the stem cell surgery and other medical expenses and because of the negligent treatment given by the opposite parties he is suffering from unbearable pain at the hip and in the spinal cord and sometimes it leads to unconsciousness. The opposite parties 1 to 3 have no valid license to give stem cell surgery treatment or bone marrow treatment; but they are unauthorized to give stem cell treatment. Hence the opposite parties are liable to compensate the loss, suffering and the complainant estimates the loss at Rs.98,00,000/- for loss of Urinal Bladder Control, sever pain, mental agony and the financial loss sustained by the complainant due to the negligence on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite parties are liable for deficiency in service.

8.                Hence the complaint against the opposite parties praying for direction to the 3^rd opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.1,25,000/- collected from the complainant towards stem cell surgeries, and for direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.98,00,000/- to the complainant for loss of Urinal Bladder Control, severe pain, mental agony and the financial loss sustained by the complainant due to the negligence on the part of the opposite parties and to pay costs.

9.                The opposite parties 1 to 3 received notice from the Commission but remained absent and so they were set exparte.

10.               The complainant filed proof affidavit reiterating the averments and the allegations in the complaint and 8 documents were filed and marked as Ex.A1 to A8 on the side of the complainant.

11.               The points for consideration are:-

                   (1)  Whether there is negligence or deficiency in service on the

part of the opposite parties?

                   (2)  Whether the complainant is entitled to claim compensation

fromthe opposite parties?

 (3)   To what relief the complainant is entitled?

POINT N0.1 &2

12.               In support of his contentions alleging negligence and deficiency in service against the opposite parties the complainant has filed 8 Exhibits.

13.               On perusal of Ex.A3 dated 21.06.2011 which is a certificate issued by 3^rd opposite party hospital we find that the complainant was admitted in the 3^rd opposite party hospital on 26.04.2011 for the treatment of stem cell, under the care of the 2^nd opposite party Dr.T.Senthil Kumar and the treatment cost Rs.1,25,000/-. It is seen from Ex.A4 series dated 25.12.2011 which is the discharge summary of 3^rd opposite party hospital that the complainant suffered from – Diagnosis – “Post Traumatic Paraparesis due to T12 Burst Fracture – Neurological Deficit” and that the patient got admitted for stem cell therapy 3^rd cycle for loss of sensation and motor action of bilateral lower limb since 3years and – CNS – sensation decreased in bilateral lower limb and on 16.09.2011 Bone Marrow  Aspirate Concentrate Procedure and CNS – power & tone decreased and sensation decreased in both lower limbs and as per the discharge summary dated 28.04.2011 he underwent Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Procedure and he had a burst fracture and was operated for it and the treatment was given by Stem cell therapy B MAC procedure and as per Ex.A4 series dated 28.04.2011 we find that he has paid Rs.8117/- and as per Ex.A4 series dated 16.05.2011 he has paid Rs.20,000/- and as per Ex.A4 series dated 15.09.2011 he has paid a sum of Rs.50,000/-.

14.               On considering the averments in the complaint and the proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the Exhibits filed by him we hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in the procedure of stem cell treatment and Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Procedure. There is no contra evidence on record.

15.               Further the opposite parties have arranged a press meet without the knowledge and consent of the complainant and flashed false information in newspapers misusing the complainant for hospital marketing purposes which amounts to gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and we hold that the complainant is entitled to claim compensation from the opposite parties and the points are answered accordingly.

POINT N0.3

16.               From Ex.A4 series we come to know that a sum of Rs.78,117/-  has been paid towards medical fees and as per the certificate Ex.A3 dated 21.06.2011 we find that a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- has been paid by the complainant to the 2^nd opposite party hospital in total inclusive of all payments under Ex.A4 (series) and so the complainant is entitled to refund of this amount. We feel that award of Rs.10,00,000/- would be the reasonable compensation for loss of Urinal Bladder Control, severe pain, and mental agony and the point is answered  accordingly.

17.               In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the 3^rd opposite party to refund the sum of Rs.1,25,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty five thousand only) collected from the complainant towards stem cell surgeries and directing the opposite parties 1 to 3 jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh only) to the complainant for loss of Urinal Bladder Control, severe pain and mental agony and to pay costs of Rs.10,000/-.

                   Time for compliance - Two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

                   In case of default in complying with the order, the amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of default till compliance.

 

P.BAKIAVATHY,                                                       J.JAYARAM,

    Member.                                                 Presiding Judicial Member.

 

ANNEXURE

List of Complainant Documents

Ex.A1      31.05.2008          Discharge Summary of M/s.Ramachandra

                                        Hospitals.

Ex.A2      07.08.2008          Discharge Summary of M/s. MIOT Hospitals.

Ex.A3      21.06.2011          Receipt for payment.

Ex.A4      25.12.2011          Discharge of Summary of M/s. Laksha Hospitals.

Ex.A5             -               News Paper Advertisement

Ex.A6             -                Advocate Notice.

Ex.A7             -                Postal Receipt.

Ex.A8             -                Ration Card.

 

List of Opposite Party Documents

 

                       - Nil  -

P.BAKIAVATHY,                                                   J.JAYARAM,

     MEMBER                                       PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER