PER SHRI P.N.KASHALKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by original Opponent Lata Mangeshkar Hospital, Nagpur against the judgment and award passed by District Forum, Nagpur in CC No.335/01 decided on 30/12/2007. By allowing the complaint partly, the Opponent was directed to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant for incorrect analysis besides Rs.15,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment and Rs.5000/- as cost. Aggrieved by this order, the Opponent has filed this appeal. Facts to the extent material may be stated as under…
Complainant No.1 & 2 are husband and wife and they had filed complaint against the Opponent Hospital which was initially dismissed by the District Forum. But the complainants preferred appeal and the State Commission, by order dated 1/2/06 quashed the said order and remanded the complaint back to the District Forum.
The case of the complaints before the forum was that’s complainant No.1 & 2 were married on 20/6/2000. Complainant No.2 was pregnant and she was taken to Opponent Hospital for medical check-up. Complainants pleaded that Opponent No.2 had sent blood sample of the complainant No.2 for blood test to the pathology of the Opponent Hospital. In the report, the blood group shown by the pathology of the Opponent Hospital was ABRH +. The complainant No.2 then took the treatment as per advise of Opponent Hospital. On 27/6/2001 complainant No.2 was admitted in Opponent Hospital where Hemoglobin test was conducted on her and doctors said that there would be normal delivery of complainant No.2. However, thereafter, doctors of the Opponent Hospital advised her to go for caesarian delivery. She was not ready for that and so she shifted herself to government medical college and hospital where she delivered a male child in a normal delivery. However, on the next day the child expired due to bad health. In government medical college and hospital her blood was tested in their pathology and it was found that her blood group is ABRH - and it was the contention of the doctors there that the patients having ABRH negative blood group should have been given coagulant injection of Anti 300 mg Gama Globulin which was not given by the Opponent Hospital because they had made wrong analysis of her blood group. Hence she filed consumer complaint and claimed amount of Rs.4,90,000/-.
The Opponent Hospital filed written version and admitted that complainant No.2 took their treatment during her pregnancy, but they pleaded that in the blood test conducted by their pathology, her blood group was correctly analyzed as ABRH -, but the complainant managed to procure pathology report from Opponent No.2 showing her blood group as ABRH +. But the said report is not signed by anybody from the hospital and hence they are not liable for the variance in the blood group of complainant No.2. Further they asserted that since there was no blood transfusion to the complainant No.2 in opponent hospital, the question of giving wrong treatment does not arise. They denied the allegation that the child of Complainant No.1 & 2 died due to their wrong analysis of blood of complainant No.2.
Considering the affidavits and documents placed on record, the forum below observed that as per discharge card of Government College & Hospital dated 30/07/2001, blood group of complainant No.2 is ABRH negative and the report of Matoshri Diagnostic Laboratory of Shrikant Ambalkar confirms the said blood group, however, the pathological report given by Opponent Hospital shows her blood group as ABRH + and it appears to have been signed by the technician. The forum below held that Opponent had wrongly analyzed the blood group of complainant No.2 despite taking charges of Rs.195/- from her for conducting said pathological test and as such doctors of the Opponent hospital were careless in performing their duty and hence the hospital was consequently responsible for their carelessness. However, the forum did not give positive finding that the complainant No.2 lost her child only because of the wrong analysis of the blood grouping done by pathology laboratory of the opponent hospital. So, the forum held that blood group of complainant No.2 was wrongly analyzed by the Opponent hospital and as such there was serious lapses on their part and they are liable for the same. Therefore the forum below was pleased to allow the complaint to that extent only. The Forum allowed the complaint partly and directed the appellant to pay compensation of Rs.20000/- towards incorrect analysis of blood grouping of complainant No.2 besides Rs.15,000/- towards physical and mental agony and Rs.5000/- as cost. This order is challenged by the Opponent No.1 Lata Mangeshkar Hospital by filing this appeal.
Heard Adv.A.V. Khare for the appellant and Adv.Shukla for Respondent. Adv.Khare for the appellant submitted before us that the compensation awarded for incorrect analysis is quite on higher side, likewise the compensation for mental harassment awarded by the forum is also on higher side and by allowing this appeal partly, the same should be reduced considerably.
We have given cautious consideration to the submissions made before us by counsel for the appellant and respondent. There is no dispute that from the record it was established that wrong pathological report was given by the pathology department of opponent to the complainant No.2 showing her blood group as ABRH + though actually it was ABRH -. So, there was incorrect analysis and wrong blood grouping was done by pathology of appellant hospital, and, therefore, some amount of compensation is required to be paid to the complainant. However, we are of the view that the amount awarded by the forum for incorrect analysis of blood and for physical and mental harassment is slightly on higher side and it requires to be reduced to do proper justice between the parties. For this limited purpose, we are inclined to allow this appeal partly and to reduce the amount for incorrect analysis of blood from Rs.20000/- to Rs.10,000/- and the amount of compensation for mental and physical harassment from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.5000/-. To this extent only, we are allowing this appeal. Hence the following order.
ORDER
1) Appeal is partly allowed.