Aggrieved by the order dated 23.03.2011 passed by Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (in short, ‘the State Commission’) in appeal No. 803 of 2008, the petitioner-hospital has filed the present petition. The appeal was filed by the complainant before the State Commission against an order dated 24.09.2007 of District Consumer Forum, by which the complaint of the complainant alleging medical negligence -2- in the treatment and seeking compensation, was dismissed. The State Commission by giving cogent reasons and proper appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence and material brought on record, upset the said finding of the District Consumer Forum and held the petitioner-doctor guilty of negligence and awarded a compensation of Rs.25,000/- by observing as under:- “The appellant had undergone abortion on 6.12.2005 and consulted the respondent with the complications of bleeding and paid which had gone undeeded by the respondent whereby the appellant was constrained to approach the Govt. Hospital and Jyothi Mother and Child Hospital. In the Govt. Hospital the appellant had undergone another operation. It cannot be said that she had incurred any expenditure in the Govt. Hospital. Taking into consideration of the totality of the circumstances, we are inclined to award an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation on all counts in favour of the appellant. We have heard Mr. Chava Badri Nath Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and have considered his submissions. He would assail the order of the State Commission primarily on the ground that it is not based on correct and proper appreciation of the evidence and material brought on record. In any case, his submission is that no medical expert was examined to establish the -3- incidence of medical negligence on the part of the petitioner-hospital. We have noted down this submission only to be rejected because going by the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case viz. that the petitioner conducted the MTP on the complainant, had not done the same properly in as much as certain part of fetus/other matter was left in, as a result of which, the complainant had profused bleeding subsequently and had to undergo another surgical procedure at another medical center. In our view, the State Commission was, therefore, fully justified in passing the impugned order and error, if any, in the judgment of the State Commission is that the petitioner has been let off by awarding a meager compensation of Rs.25,000/- for which the petitioner should thank her stars. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. | 
