Delhi

South West

CC/17/602

SMT. INDRAWATI - Complainant(s)

Versus

ROCKLAND HOSPITAL DWARKA & ANR - Opp.Party(s)

29 Nov 2017

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum- VII, South West District, Delhi

(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

 

Complaint Case No.: DF-VII/CC/602/2017

In the matter of

Smt Indrawati

W/o Sh. Ram Mehar

R/o House No. RZF 41/7 A, Sadh Nagar

Part II, Palam Colony

New Delhi- 110045                                                                                     …          Complainant

Versus

 

The Medical Superintendent

Rockland Hospital, Dwarka

Sector 12, HAF-B, Phase- I, Dwarka

New Delhi- 110075                                                                          …        Opposite Party No. 1

 

Dr Raman Kumar Sharma

C/o Rockland Hospital, Dwarka

Sector 12, HAF-B, Phase- I, Dwarka

New Delhi- 110075                                                                          …        Opposite Party No. 2

 

Dr Priya

C/o Rockland Hospital, Dwarka

Sector 12, HAF-B, Phase- I, Dwarka

New Delhi- 110075                                                                           …        Opposite Party No. 3

 

Present Son/ AR of the Complainant Sh Dinesh Kumar

ORDER

29/11/2017

 

(Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar, President)

We have heard the arguments of the AR of the Complainant on admissibility of the complaint.

The case of the Complainant is that she was suffering from chest pain, upper limb pain, Ghabrahat, palpitation etc. Therefore, on 10/05/2017, she was admitted in the Agrasen Hospital (not a party), Dwarka. After conducting preliminary tests, the doctors at Agrasen Hospital took a decision to refer the Complainant to higher medical institute for cardiac evaluation. Hence, the Complainant was shifted, on the same night, to Rockland Hospital, which is arrayed through its Medical Superintendent (OP-1). She was initially examined by one Dr Priya (OP-3) in the emergency ward. It is case of the Complainant that the Complainant and her family members handed over all previous records to OP-3, but without going through these records, she recorded the preliminary diagnosis as “Anxiety Disorder” and admitted the Complainant under the supervision of one Dr Raman Kumar Sharma (OP-2). As the condition of the Complainant did not improve, on the request of the family members of the Complainant, she was discharged on 12/05/2017. Thereafter, the Complainant was examined by one Dr B B Chanana (not a party) on 14/05/2017 and on his recommendation, the Complainant was again admitted at Maharaja Agrasen Hospital on 19/05/2017, where the preliminary diagnosis of the problem of the Complainant was “CAD-Angina”. It is to be noted that the Complainant was discharged from Maharaja Agrasen Hospital after conducting certain tests which revealed normal coronaries. She was advised medical management of her condition.

It is also important to mention here that between 12/05/2017 and 19/05/2017, the Complainant was examined by the doctors at Janakpuri Super Speciality Hospital (not a party) on 17/05/2017 where the Complainant was diagnosed with “Stable Angina”, which is defined as chest pain or discomfort due to coronary heart disease. At Janakpuri Super Speciality Hospital, certain tests were also conducted on the Complainant, which were normal.

The Complainant primarily challenges the preliminary diagnosis by OPs. It is the case of the Complainant that “Anxiety Disorder” was wrongly diagnosed by OPs when the other hospitals have diagnosed the case of the complainant as “Stable Angina” and “CAD Angina”. It is also stated by the Complainant that because of wrong diagnosis, the Complainants cashless claim facility was denied by the Insurance Company Apollo Munich Health Insurance Company Limited (not a party). However, no documents on record suggest that such claim was denied by the insurance company. As a matter of fact, the cashless facility was approved by the Insurance Company for treatment of the Complainant in Maharaja Agrasen Hospital. The Complainant also alleges that the treatment of Anxiety Disorder by the OPs was wrong treatment and hence this is a case of medical negligence.

We have seen the records of the complaint. We do not agree with the Complainant that this is case if medical negligence particularly for the reason that the Complainant has failed to establish that the OPs and particularly the treating doctors has adopted treatment in violation of accepted medical practice and skill. The initial diagnosis at the OP-1 hospital, Anxiety Disorder was preliminary diagnosis and was not conclusive and final. Further the discharge summery of OP-1 hospital suggests that conservative management procedure was adopted for treating the Complainant. Further the reports of all tests were normal which does not suggest any kind of cardiac problem in the Complainant. It is also important to mention here that medical journals suggest that symptoms of Anxiety Disorder and CAD- Angina are similar and sometimes even identical. The documents and pleadings also do not suggest that the OPs have wrongly diagnosed the problem of the Complainant and have given wrong treatment to the Complainant. The documents and pleadings also do not suggest that some wrong was caused by the treatment by OP-2 and OP-3 Doctors in her/ his treatment or in her/ his diagnosis and that the said doctors have not acted in accordance with the practice accepted as proper by medical professionals or that even the results were wrong.

Hence, in view of the observation above, we are of the opinion that this complaint is devoid of merit and is dismissed at admission stage itself.

A copy of this final order be supplied to the Complainant free of cost in terms of the rules. Copy of this order be also sent to the website. Thereafter, the file be consigned to the record.

Order pronounced on 29/11/2017.

 

 

 

        (S.S.Sidhu)                         (Harshali Kaur)                   (Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar)

          Member                              Member                                 President