Tripura

West Tripura

CC/45/2016

Sri Deepjyoti Biswas. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director ILS Hospital & 1 another. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.SBhattacharya, Mr.B.Chakraborty, Smt.K.Roy Barman.

22 Sep 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

CASE   NO:   CC- 45 of 2016

Sri Deepjyoti Biswas,
S/O- Sri Dinesh Biswas,
Rungutia, P.O. Bamutia,
P.S. Lefunga, West Tripura.            ..…..…...Complainant.

          -VERSUS-

1. Managing Director, 
ILS Hospital(Near Secretariat),
P.S. New Capital Complex,
Agartala, West Tripura.                ..…...Opposite party.

2. Managing Director,
Nightingale Hospital,
11 Shakesphaere Sarani,
Kolkata- 700071.                     ..….....Proforma O.P.

      __________PRESENT__________

 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER  
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

C O U N S E L

    For the Complainant        : Sri Surajit Bhattacharje,
                          Sri Basudev Chakraborty,
                          Smt. Kathakali Roy Barman,
                          Advocates.

For the O.P.     1 & 2             : Sri Sankar Bhattacharya,
                      Sri Samir Debbarma,
                      Advocate.

    JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:    22.09.2016

J U D G M E N T
    
            This case arises on the petition filed by one Deepjyoti Biswas U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. Case filed against the Managing Director, ILS Hospital, Managing Director Nightingale Hospital was made proforma O.P.
            Petitioner case in brief is that he visited ILS Hospital, Agartala with abdominal pain on 13.12.15. He was admitted into the hospital and ultrasography of whole abdomen was done. On 14.12.15 he was discharged. As per advice on 19.12.15 he was treated by Dr. Akash Chakma at ILS Hospital but he did not get any relief and went to Kolkata. Complainant was advised to undergo clinical test and sonography was done. Gall bladder stone was detected. There was also some abnormality in the appendic. Petitioner was treated there spending a lot of amount. Petitioner claimed compensation Rs.4,89,096/- for deficiency of service by the O.P. ILS hospital.

        O.P. ILS Hospital authority, Chief Operating Officer filed W.S denying the claim. It is stated that Petitioner denied to take further treatment and went to Nightingale Hospital Kolkata. In the Nightingale Hospital no gall bladder stone was found in ultrasonography and the claim of the petitioner is baseless and liable to be rejected. 
        On the basis of contention petitioner and O.P. following points cropped up for determination:-
        (I) Whether there was any wrong done while doing Ultrasonography at ILS hospital?
        (II) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get any compensation for deficiency of service?

        At the later stage O.P. No.2, Nightingale Hospital filed one W.S.  It is stated that the patient was admitted in their hospital with the history of appendicular lump and was treated thereafter. 

        In this case we shall now determine the above points on the basis evidence and documents filed by both the parties.
        
            Findings and decision:
        From the scrutiny of the papers of Nightingale hospital it is found that the patient was admitted in the Nightingale hospital on 24.12.15 and discharged on 30.12.15. Ultra sonography was done. CT scan of whole abdomen was done. In the CT scan report  lump is noted in the right Illiac Fossa. It was impressed that perforative appendicitis with perifiphocal imflamatory changes. On 05.02 Ultrasonography of whole abdomen was done in the Nightingale. In that report also appendicular lump with appendicolith was found. No gall bladder stone found in the ultrasonography and CT scan done in the Nightingale hospital. The contention of the petitioner that gall bladder stone found as written in the petition therefore, is found baseless. Finally appendic treatment was done at Nightingale Hospital.  
        In the ILS hospital, Agartala  the inflammatory changes of appendix or perforated appendicitis was not detected by ultrasonography. But CACT of abdomen was suggested for further evaluation. 
        We have gone through the Ultrasound report done at ILS Hospital. It was done by Nani Gopal Tripura, Md.Radiologist. Ultrasonography was done on 14.12.15. Moderate fatty liver, cyst in liver renal cortical was found, Cystitis also found. There is no finding on appendic. On the basis of this report Radiologist, Dr. Akash Chakma examined and treated the petitioner. So concerned doctor had no fault. On 14.12.15 Nanigopal Tripura, the Radiologist did ultrasonography in ILS hospital. It revealed nothing about any abnormality in the appendic. But after 10 days on 25.12.15 Radiologist of Nightingale Hospital Dr. B.N. Mallik Md. Radilogist found one lump mild fluid collection in the appendicolith. Definitely  it was in existence while petitioner was suffering abdomen pain & went to ILS hospital on 14.12.15. It was growing and on 5.2.15 again ultrasonography done in the Nightingale found the lump. 
         From careful scrutiny it is found that actually the wrong was done by Radiologist of the ILS hospital Dr. Nanigopal Tripura. Might be appendic lump was of small size before 10 day. But no findings given on appendic by radiologist of ILS Hospital. It is not the medical negligence case of ILS hospital. The radiologist appointed by them in the hospital is Md. and Radiologist. He failed to discharge the duty while doing the examination of ultrasonography. Such wrong findings some times may cause heavy loss even it can cause death by blasting of appendic. But in this case petitioner did not suffer any loss. He went to Kolkata & the appendic lump was detected there after 10 days. Thereafter he was properly treated and cured there. ILS Hospital authority was not responsible for his treatment at Kolkata. Such treatment was inevitable for his recovery and accordingly it was done. It can not be said that all kind of treatment was available in the ILS hospital. Petitioner also did not continue treatment there. As the ultrasonography report was incorrect, so we consider that an amount taken for treatment in the ILS hospital should be returned as it was a wrong treatment done there without proper investigation. As it is not a case of medical negligence we can not give any further relief in this case.  Both the points are decided accordingly.

         In view of the above findings over the two points  this petition is partly allowed. We direct the ILS hospital authority to refund the amount taken as medical expenditure as wrong treatment was done there following the wrong report of the radiologist. Both the parties are to bear their own cost. 
 
                   Announced.

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA    SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.