SMT.MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER

     This is a  complaint filed by the complainant  U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 for an order directing the OPs to  pay Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the loss sustained to the complainant’s son from the medical negligence and inefficient services rendered by the OPs and cost of litigation to the  complainant for the  deficiency of service and unfair trade practice  on the part of OPs.

  The brief of the complaint :

    The complainant’s son named Mohammed Shahabas Ameen, aged 7 years admitted in HNC  Irrikkur clinic on 5/4/2023 at 1.30 p.m for the customary traditional practice of circumcision of the  male child.  The 2^nd OP pretending as a qualified surgeon conducted the surgery of circumcision  on the child on the same day and discharged for the advise and rest for one week.  The child was asked to come back for review after the said period. But after one week the surgical incision on the pennies was not healed but worsened and it  became infection also.  The pain and sufferings of the child, the child was not in a position to sleep properly since the surgery .  Till 10/4/2023 the child was brought to 2^nd OP for more than 6 times regarding the wound on his pennies.  The condition of the wound got worse and the child was admitted to ABC Medical Hospital Mattanur on 10/4/2023 under the treatment of Dr.Mohammed Askar.  As per his opinion this condition happened because of the medical negligence and excessive removal of the  foreskin along  with parts of the glands penis.  The doctor also stated that the tip of the penis of the child might have to be removed if the condition persist.  This may also cause impotency and inability to lead a marital life also. As per the expert opinion it is a mistake and medical negligence happened  solely on the part of  2^nd OP  during  the surgery .  On 10/5/2023 then the complainant send lawyer notice to both OPs.  1^st OP received the notice  on 13/5/2023 and 2^nd OP’s notice was returned addressee left.  After the enquiry the complainant got information that 2^nd OP started a clinic at Pokkund, Kurumathur, near Taliparamba named as “Q-medic Specialty hospital.  Then the complainant filed a complaint before the  police and on enquiry 2^nd OP eloped from the locality and the given registration  No. as 27137 of Travancore Medical Council was in the name of another doctor Dr.Ambalathil Mujeeb Rehman,Nazeem Manzil, Pazhayangadi.  Then the secretary of IMA, Dr.Arunkumar filed  a complaint before the Superintendent of Police Kannur.  Then the investigation , it  discovered that the 2^nd OP was from Balusseri, Kozhikode and he was not a qualified  medical practitioner.  The 1^st OP has the bounden duty to verify the certificate and qualification of  employees prior to the appointment of his  hospital.  So the 1^st OP has the sole responsibility of the incident occurred in the hospital .  The act of both OPs the complainant’s son’s future life is adversely affected.  The complainant and her son caused much mental agony and financial loss  The complainant incurred huge expense for the treatment, loss of future  of the child.  Due to  improper treatment of an unqualified doctor the complainant and her son expecting huge amount for future treatment.  So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of both OPs.  Hence the complaint.

           After filing the complaint, notice  issued to  both OPs . 1^st  OP received the notice and 2^nd OP’s notice returned  as addressee left.  Then the  complainant filed substitute service against 2^nd OP also.  Thereafter both OPs not appeared before the commission and not filed version . The commission had to hold that both OPs have not appeared before the commission and not filed version . As  such this case came to be proceed against the  OPs are  set  exparte.

    Even though the OPs remained ex-parte it is for the complainant to establish the allegations made by him against the OPs.  Hence the complainant  was called upon to produce evidence in the form of affidavit and documents.   Accordingly the  complainant has chosen to produce  her chief affidavit along with 10 documents marking them  as Exts.A1 to  A10. The complainant  was examined as PW1 and one  Dr.Mohammed Askar is also examined as PW2 in this case.  So the OPs remain  absent in this case.  At the end the Commission heard the case on merit. 

    Let us have a clear glance at the relevant documents of the complainant.  Exts.A1 to A3 are the cash invoice dtd.5/4/2023 in 1^st OP’s hospital for an amount of Rs.2500/-,Rs.279/-,Rs.574 respectively.  Ext.A4 is the medical  prescription  issued  by ABC Medicare dtd.10/4/203.  Ext.A5 is the  copy of lawyer notice Ext.A6 is the postal receipt.  Ext.A7 is the acknowledgment card of 1^st OP.  Ext.A8 is the returned lawyer notice.  Ext.A9 is the copy of   paper publication  and Ext.A10 is the paper publication bill.    As per the evidence of  PW1 it clearly shows that her son Mohammed Shahabas Ameen, aged 7 years admitted in 1^st OP’s hospital on 5/4/2023 at about 1.30 P.M for the customary tradition of circumcision of the child and 2^nd OP conducted  the operation of circumcision to the child  on the same  day, discharged the child advising to take rest for 1 week and come back for reviewing after one week. But the wound of the operation on the penis was not completely healed and worsened and became  infection.  The pain and suffering of the child  he was not in a position to sleep properly.  Moreover, in the evidence of PW2 who deposed that   “ഒരു doctor നെ hospital ലേയ്ക്ക് appoint ചെയ്യുന്നതിന്ർറെ methods അറിയുമോ? എനിക്കറിയാം. Degree certificate, internalship certificate, Travancore and Cochi യുടെ  Medical registration mandatory ആണ്.Experience certificate additional  ആയി ചോദിക്കാറുണ്ട്.  ഈcertificate  ഉള്ള ആളെ മാത്രമേ doctor ആയി practice ചെയ്യാൻ അനുവദിക്കൂ എന്ന്  Kerala Medical counsel  ന്ർറെ  rules ഉണ്ട്. 2^nd OP വ്യാജ doctor ആണെന്ന് പത്ര മാധ്യമത്തിൽ കണ്ടിരുന്നു   Muhammed Shahabas എന്ന കുട്ടിയെ നിങ്ങൾ treat ചെയ്തിരുന്നു? അതെ. 2 മാസ്സക്കാലം ചികിത്സിച്ചിരുന്നു.  കുട്ടിക്ക് circumcision ചെയ്തിരുന്നു. അത് heal ആകുന്നില്ല.  Bleeding with pain  ആയിട്ടാണ് എന്നെ സമീപിച്ചത്. നിങ്ങൾ പരിശോധിക്കുമ്പോൾ കുട്ടിയുടെ penis ന്ർറെ അഗ്രഭാഗം 75% നഷ്ടപ്പെട്ടിരുന്നു? അതെ penis ന്ർറെ അഗ്രഭാഗം ആണ് urinary control ഉം sexual ആയിട്ടുള്ള glands ഉം അവിടെയാണ് ഉള്ളത്? അതെ.ഇപ്പോൾ ഈ കുട്ടി മൂത്രം ഒഴിക്കുന്നത് different  direction- ൽ ആണ്? അതെ. അത് അറിയാതെ പോകുകയും ചെയ്യുന്നുണ്ട്.Controlചെയ്യാൻ പറ്റാതെയാണുള്ളത്. ഈ കുട്ടി major ആയാൽsexual intercourse ദാമ്പത്യ ജീവിതത്തിൽ ബുദ്ധിമുട്ടുണ്ടാകും? അതെ. ഇത് plastic surgery   ചെയ്താൽ തന്നെ 100% success ആണോ? ചെയ്താൽ തന്നെ 50% perfection നെ കാണുകയുള്ളൂ. Qualified അല്ലാത്ത ഒരു doctor ഈ  surgery ചെയ്തതുകൊണ്ടാണ് കുട്ടിക്ക് ഇപ്പോഴത്തെ അവസ്ഥ ഉണ്ടായത്? അതെ. അങ്ങനെ ഒരു doctor ടെ ചികിത്സാപിഴവ് ഉണ്ടായാൽ അവരെ  appoint  ചെയ്ത  hospital നാണ് പൂർണ്ണ ഉത്തരവാദിത്വം? അതെ. ഒരു നല്ല hospital-ൽ നിന്ന് plastic surgery കുട്ടിക്ക് നടത്തണമെങ്കിൽ 30 ലക്ഷംരൂപ വേണ്ടിവരുമെന്ന് പറഞ്ഞാൽ? ശരിയാണ്. As per the evidence of PW2 who clearly states that there is deficiency in service  ad unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. Under this circumstances, we are of the  considered view that the  OPs are directly bound to redressal the grievance caused to the complainant. The act of  OPs the complainant’s son suffered  much mental  strain, pain and suffering .  The complainant also suffered huge financial loss, mental agony, pain and  sufferings, huge amount spend for treatment, loss of future of the child and huge money for expecting future treatment etc. so the OPs 1&2 are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.9,00,000/-   as compensation  for future  treatment  expenses of the child, mental strain and loss of life of the complainant’s child along with Rs.1,00,000/-  as compensation  for mental agony caused to the  complainant and  Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.

           In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing  the opposite parties 1&2 are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.9,00,000/- to the complainant  as future  treatment  expenses of the child,  and loss of life of the complainant’s son along with Rs.1,00,000/-  as compensation  for mental agony caused to the  complainant and  Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost within 30 days of receipt of this order. In default the amount of Rs.9,00,000/- carries  interest @12% per annum  from the date of order till realization .  Failing which  the  complainant is  at liberty to  execute  the  order as  per the  provisions  of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts:

A1 to A3- cash invoice dtd.5/4/2023 in 1st OP’s hospital for an amount of Rs.2500/-,Rs.279/-,Rs.574

A4- medical  prescription  issued  by ABC Medicare dtd.10/4/203.

A5- copy of lawyer notice

A6 - postal receipt.

A7 - acknowledgment card of 1st OP. 

A8-returned lawyer notice.

A9-copy of   paper publication

A10- paper publication bill.

PW1-Rasheeda- complainant.

PW2-Dr.Mohammed Askar-witness of PW1

Sd/                                                                    Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                        MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                        /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR