OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAMRUP,GUWAHATI
C.C.9/14
Present:-
1)Md.Sahadat Hussain, A.J.S. - President
2)Sri Upendra Nath Deka - Member
Mrs.Lata Saraf -Complainant
W/o. Mr. Shyam Sundar Saraf,
Resident of House No. 13, Mandakini Path,
Kalyanpur,Dispur,Guwahati-6
District: Kamrup (Metro),Assam
-vs-
1) Rahman Hospital Pvt. Ltd., - Opp.parties
V.I.P.Road, Six-mile,Guwahati-22,
District Kamrup (Metro),Assam
Pin-781006.
2) Dr.M.L.A.Rahman,,
Chairman and Managing Director
Rahman Hospital Pvt. Ltd.,
V.I.P.Road, Six-mile,Guwahati-22,
District Kamrup (Metro),Assam
Appearance-
Learned advocates Mr.A.Ganguli and Mr.A.Borah for the complainant
Date of argument- 2.6.2016
Date of judgment- 17.6.2016
EXPARTE JUDGMENT
This is a complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
1)The complaint filed by the complainant Mrs.Lata Saraf was registered and admitted on 27.1.14 and notices were served upon the opp.parties namely Rahman Hospital Pvt.Ltd. and Dr.M.L.A.Rahman and they also filed their written statement . After filing of the affidavit by the complainant, the opp.parties are found absent without step and hence this forum vide order dated 18.3.16, passed direction that the case against the opp.parties will proceed on exparte. The complainant sides’ ld counsel filed their written argument and on 2.6.16 forwarded their written argument.
We have perused the pleadings of the parties and the evidence of the complainant side. We have also perused the argument of ld counsels of the complainant side; and today, we deliver the judgment which is as below.
2) The complainants’ case in brief is that she was diagnosed on 15.6.2013 with LS/S1 discextrusion and was admitted in Rahman Hospital Pvt.Ltd., Sixmile Guwahati on 15.6.13 vide Hospital Registraion NO.37620 and was advised to undergo immediate surgery by Dr.M.L.A. Rahman (Opp.Party No.2) and that very day she underwent L5 partial laminectomy L5/S1 bilateral discectomy under general anesthesia and was released on 19.6.2013 with advice to take regular medication and to appear for review after six months. After released, she was suffering from recurrent increased back pain and also pain in both the arms and her condition was deteriorating and then she was again admitted in the said hospital on 31.7.13, but discharged on 1.8.2013 with prescription of some medicines for pain management, but she finding no reduction in pain, she was again brought to that hospital on 29.8.13 and stitches were removed on advice of Opp.Party No.2 and dressing was done , but post-operative wound showed no sign of healing and then she was again brought to the said hospital on 18.9.13 and she was again given some high power medicines ,but after three months of surgery her wound had not healed up and she faced difficulty in walking due to acute pain. Thereafter, her condition became more acute and then she being compelled took advice from Dr.Mukesh Agarwal,a specialist in Orthopedics at International hospital, Guwahati on 21.9.13 and there M.R.I.scan and pathological examination were done and an approximately 32 X 14 mm sized collection with thickening enhancing wall within the soft tissue thickening was detected at LS-SI was detected in the M.R.I. Scan; with revelation of abnormal enhancement of disc at LS-S1 and irregularity alongwith prospective wound infection and Dr.Agarwal doubted that something was wrong with her and he advised her to go outside the state for advance treatment. Thereafter, she was brought to Rahman Hospital where she was advised to take second operation after perusing MRI report and that advice scared her and in order to dispel such fear she was taken to Apollo hospital, Chennai and she was operated there on 1.10.13 and a whitish material with pus was removed from par spinal region and was sent for histo-pathological examination and in the said examination, which was done on 2.10.13, it was found that the materials are a soft-tissue measuring 3’5 cm X 1’5 cm with cut surface showing foreign body material (cotton), and she was released on 5.10.13 after said surgery with advice of medication and after that surgery the pain began to subside and the wound in the operation site healed up within no time. The fact of removal of soft tissue and foreign body materials resembling cotton indicates that the opp.parties conducted surgery of the complainant in a negligent manner by leaving some foreign body material at the wound side which further added to her problem.
3) We have perused the written statement filed by Opp.Party NO.1 & 2. We have found that Opp.Party No.1 & 2 in their written statement admit that the complainant had been hospitalized in Opp.Party No.1 hospital on 15.6.2013 with complaint of sufferings from acute lowback pain off and on since previous 6 yearswhich increased with radiation to the right lower limbs since may 2013 making it difficult in walking and she was diagnosed on that very day with LS/S1 discextrusion and she was operated by L5 partial laminectomy L5/S1 bilateral discectomy under general anesthesia and was discharged from hospital on 19.6.2013 with advice to take regular medicine and for review . Thus, it is crystal clear that the complainant was diagnosed on 15.6.2013 by Opp.Party NO.1 hospital with LS/S! discextrusion and she was hospitalized there and she unwent L5 partial Laminectomy L5/S1 bilateral discectomy under general anesthesia and she was advised to take medicine regularly, but released on 1.8.13. From Ext.3 , it appears to us that the complainant was asked to come for review after six weeks, but not after six months as said by the complainant.
The op.parties in their written statement admit that the complainant was, again, brought to their hospital on 29.8.13 with swelling in the operated area and on that day the stitches were removed but asked to review on the next day and very next day and dressing was done on the operated area and she was again brought to their hospital on 18.9.2013 for check up and dressing was also done on that day. Thus, it is established that the complainant was brought to the hospital of Opp.Party NO.1 on 29.8.13 with complaint of pain and on that day stitches were removed from the operated area and dressing was done and again she was brought to the said hospital on the next day and dressing was done, and thereafter she was again brought to the said hospital and on date also dressing was done on the operated portion.
4)The complainant states that while her condition became acute even after taking necessary medication, she approached Dr.Mukesh Kr.Agarwala of International Hospital on whose advice MRI was done and the MRI Report shows 32 mmX13mm sized collection with thickening in the operated portion which was abnormal enhancement of disc at L5-S1 with wound. We have perused Ext.5 , which is MRI Report that was done at Ayursundra, Lachit Nagar, Guwahati and found that on MRI it was ditected at LS/S1 discectomy position inflamatony soft tissue thickening and PHLEGMONOUS changes around the LAMINECTOMY site with Intermingled Collection , End plate irregularities, Abnormal Enhancement of LS-S1 Disc, soft Tissue Thickening in the Epidural Space and details as described-suggest post operative wound infection with Spondylodiscitis. This fact shows that the condition of complainant became critical even after taking treatment by her in the hospital of Opp.Party No.1 after the operation i.e. on 31.7.2013 to 1.8.2013,29.8.2013 and on 18.9.2013.
From the evidence of the complainant it is clear that she went to Apollo Hospital, Chennai on 1.10.2013 and was also admitted for persistent discharge from the operated portion and was also operated on that very date and whitish soft material with pus was removed from the operated portion and sent for histopathalogical examination and that was done on 2.10.13 and the report shows that the whitish material was a soft tissue measuring 3.5X1.5X1 cm with cut surface showing foreigh body material(cotton). From Ext. A, the discharge Report of Apollo hospital, it is seen that Apollo hospital had done preoperative work on surgical site of the complainant on 1.10.2013 and removed a whitish soft material with pus from paraspinal region and sent for histopathological examination and also removed the subcutaneous drain and also provided treatment for rashes in the operated side. From Ext.7, the histopathological report of the removed whitish soft materials shows dense mixed Infiltrate of neutrophils, histocytes and Lymphocytes against a background of necrosis and strand of foreign-body material. Occasional multinucleate giant cess are seen, without sign of granuloma or Malignancy.
Thus from Ext.7 (histopathological Report of the histopathology department of Apollo hospital) as well as Ext.-8 (discharge Summary of the said hospital), it is clear that Apollo Hospital has done preoperative work up (Minor operation ) on the surgical site of the complainant on 1.10.2013 and removed whitish materials with pus from the surgical site and also removed subcutaneous drain from the said site and on histopathological examination of the said whitish soft materials . It was found dense mixed infiltrate of neutrophils, histocytes and Lymphocytes against a background of necrosis and strand of foreign body material. From the discharge report it is seen that after removal of whitish materials from the surgical site by the Apollo Hospital, the complainant was relieved from pain and wound was properly healed and she was released on 5.10.2013. The second thing, clears to us that the strands foreign material that was found removed by the Apollo hospital from the Surgical site of the complainant. She was fully relieved from pain and got the wound properly healed. The strands of foreigh body material which was detected from the surgical site, in our opinion is the cause of suffering from acute pain, weakness and discharge of pus from the surgical site of the surgery that was done by Opp.Party No.1 hospital on the position of L5-S1 Disc of the spine of the complainant and the said strands of foreign body material had negligently been left in the operation site by the surgeon of Opp.Party NO.1 and said foreign body materials were not even removed by the surgeon which he has checked up the complainant and removed the stitches and did the dressing the surgical site on 1.8.13, 29.8.13 and on 18.9.13. So, it is a clear case of medical negligence in result of which the complainant had to go to Apollo Hospital, Chennai and undergo further surgery and treatment. On such medical negligence , Opp.Party No.1 is liable to bear whatever expenses the complainant has incurred in her treatment on Apollo hospital , Chennai and also to pay proper compensation for causing pain and suffering to her alongwith cost of the proceeding
5)From the evidence of the complainant, it is found that she estimated the cost of surgery as Rs.4.0 lakhs, but she files no vouchers on cash memo as to the expenditure she had made in the hospital of Opp.Party No.1 as well as in Apollo Hospital. In such situation, we are to make guess work. So, we presume that the complainant might have spent atleast Rs.1.00 lakh in her treatment in the hospital of Opp.Party No.1 and Apollo hospital. We are also in opinion that the Opp.Party No.1 is liable to pay atleast RS.20,000/- as compensation for causing pain and suffering to the complainant as well as Rs.10,000/- as cost of proceeding.
6) Basing on above findings, as we have found, the complaint against Opp.Party No.1,Rahman Hospital Pvt.Ltd, VIP Road, Six mile, Guwahati-22 is allowed on exparte and they are directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only to the complainant as the cost of her treatment she has undergone and also to pay her Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand)only as compensation for causing pain and suffering to her alongwith Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand)only as cost of proceeding. They are directed to pay the amounts within two months, in default of which , interest @ 12 % per annum shall entail.
Given under our hands and seal of this forum on this day 17th June, 2016.
Free copies of judgment be delivered to the parties.
Mr.U.N.Deka Md.S.Hussain
Member President
