BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.110 of 2022
Date of Instt. 05.04.2022
Date of Decision: 03.01.2023
Joginder Pal Sharma aged 80 years s/o Kundan Lal r/o EE-192, New Railway Road Mohalla Inder Prasat Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. Shree Ram Neuro Centre 26, 27 Link Road Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar City through its Proprietor/Owner.
2. Dr. Parmod Mahender 26-27, Link Road, Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar through owner/proprietor of Hospital
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
Present: Sh. D. K. Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.
OPs No.1 & 2 exparte.
Order
Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the complainant had visited OP’s hospital in response to the hand bill for general public, arranging camp therein "offering free check up from 15-1-22 to 22-1-22 from 10 AM to 3 P. M. relating to spine and joint, bones problems. The OP offered free sugar, BMD tests, medicines, all blood tests. X-ray etc. other blood tests will be offered at discounted rates, special discount in surgeries. For information was to be contacted-9878979001 and 7508031515”. Lured by the pamphlet, the complainant visited hospital for getting himself checked up for “burning sensation in calf muscles and feet and for swelling and tenderness of lower limbs etc on 17-1-22 at 10.50 AM.” He was advised to be case of “Deep Veins Thrombosis with past history of diabetes hypertension etc. He informed the doctor that he wants CT Scan done on him. He cajoled and persuaded the complainant to have admission in the hospital immediately for better treatment. He was admitted in the hospital and made him deposit Rs 10,000/- under receipt No.12337 dated 17-1-22 with them for treatment of feeling of burning sensation and weakness in calf muscles and assured him to give him relevant and necessary treatment to his entire satisfaction. The patient has been reminding the hospital and Dr. Pramod and his staff to send or get his CT Scan done but instead hearing him and getting the job done, had been making lame excuses assuring him that it will be got done sooner or later. Finding them highly careless, got himself released from the hospital in the evening at about 6 PM to spend the night at home. The hospital had gladly granted his request. Finding the hospital highly negligent, deficient in rendering services for not getting his CT Scan indulged in unnecessary tests and investigations which was unnecessary for the diagnosis calf weakness, they discharged him on 18th January, 2022 at 4:15 PM without CT Scan, but maneuvered to show to have got him on discharged 19-1-22 (when actually it was 18-1-22) to inflate his bill learnt from hind sight subsequently. The patient at the time of discharge refunded him only Rs.800/- out of Rs 10,000/-pocketing Rs.9200/- negligence without any treatment with maneuvered admission of 17-1-22 for a day. The patient had his all para meters of health excellent meaning had BP 130/90, Pulse 88 Temp. 98.7 etc. as per discharge slip. To show to have rendered the treatment, the hospital prescribed medicines for further 5 days after discharge. The treatment was absent, deficient in getting CT Scan admission was only to pocket Rs.9200/- out of Rs.10,000/- to justify the admission. No explanation was forth coming. But he was put off under one pretext or another. The medical records and case history of complainant was required for reference and record. But it was supplied later after fudging the records which is totally against law. And professional conduct and Etiquette and Ethics. That the medical negligence is writ large because:-
i. Laboratory investigations were unnecessary as pain stiffness and weakness in the muscles in old age itself reduces flexibility and movement;
ii. Medicines were not necessary and prescribed were more in number and quantity for number of days than necessary to show some kind of treatment rendered to him. The complainant had Muscular Rheumatism in which small lumps appear in various muscles which cause pain and stiffness on movement;
iv. Exposure was due to cold and long sitting accompanies rheumatism of the joints
v. CT scan was not got done for which the complainant was pursuing. vi. Negligence in treatment-No advice on muscular degeneration and necessity to maintain an active life. Exercise to make muscle movement easier Reduction in body weight, pain management therapy etc.
The Medical Council of India in exercise of the powers conferred under section 20-A read with section 33(m) of the Indian Council Act, 1956 with previous approval of the Central Government has made regulations relating to the Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics. The aforesaid regulations came into effect from 6-4-2002. That under regulation No 1.3.1 on Maintenance of Medical Records, it has been provided specifically that each physician shall maintain the medical records pertaining to her indoor patient for a period of three years in a standard proforma. That regulation No.1.3.2 further provides that if any request is made for medical records either by the patient/ authorized attendant or legal authorities involved, the same may be duly acknowledged and documents shall be issued within a period of 72 hours. However, since the complainant was discharged on 18-1-22 Medical records should have been supplied then and there. It is strange that Dr. concerned/Proprietor of the hospital and his hospital staff under his control and supervision and Dr. Sahib, a member of the Indian Medical Council of India is not complying with the laws and regulations framed with its approval and has been denying and rather delayed its delivery to fudge the records to justify refund of meager amount or prevented the supply of medical records of complainant either to him or his representative. The Hon’ble High Courts has already held in a case in which these regulations came up for adjudication and held: “Patient requesting for medical records relating to treatment. It is mandatory that records should be furnished copies of documents within 72 hours from the date of demand - a patient or victim's relative is entitled to know whether proper medical care was rendered to the patient entrusted with hospital which will be revealed from case sheet and medical records". That his client had met him and his staff number of times personally but he and his staff had been making excuses in supplying it in the next few days when it has to be supplied within 72 hours as stipulated in the aforesaid regulations. Not to speak of its compliance being member of Indian Medical Council, he has not cared to supply the medical case history to his client The hospital authorities not to speak of supplying the case history did not even care to listen to him. Non compliance to the request of the complainant which is sanctified by law shows that not only the doctors in the hospital care little to carry out the obligations under taken by them by being members of the Indian Medical Council but also the law as made applicable to doctors running the hospitals in regard to the professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics. Indian Medial Council and they need to be apprised of it to remind the doctor of its obligations and co operation to the public through public notice. The opposite party rendered deficient services and breached the duty of proper care and treatment in the ways. The patient was neither diagnosed nor properly nor treated properly nor case history written nor provided in accordance the rules of Medical Council. Being guilty of deficient services as above and for breach which a reasonable doctor in the hospital would do or doing something which a prudent and reasonable would not do and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund Rs.10,000/- retained illegally and further OP be directed to pay damages amounting to Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 18% from the date of filing complaint and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but they refused to receive the notice and ultimately both the OPs were proceeded against exparte.
3. In order to prove his case, the complainant alongwith his counsel tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some document Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the case file very minutely.
5. In nutshell, the case of the complainant is that he had visited OP’s hospital, when he came to know about the camp from the pamphlet therein “offering free check up from 15.01.2022 to 22.01.2022 from 10 AM to 3 PM relating to spine and joint, bones problems and the OP also offered, free sugar, BMD test, medicines, all blood tests, X-ray etc. Other blood tests will be offered at discounted rates and special discount in surgeries. Allured by the facilities offered, the complainant visited hospital for getting himself checked up for burning sensation in calf muscles and feet and for swelling and tenderness of lower limbs etc. on 17.01.2022 at 10:50 AM. He was advised to be case of “Deep Veins Thrombosis with past history of diabetics hypertension etc. He was admitted in the hospital. He deposited Rs.10,000/- under receipt No.12337 dated 17.01.2022 with them for treatment of feeling of burning sensation and weakness in calf muscles, which is evident from Ex.C-3. He wanted CT Scan for the diagnosis of calf weakness, but the same was not done by the doctors and he was discharged on 18th January, 2022 without CT scan. At the time of discharge, the complainant was refunded only Rs.800/- out of Rs.10,000/-, which is clear cut negligence.
6. From the document Ex.C-1, it is clear that the free camp for check up was organized by the OPs from 16 to 22, January 2022. As per Ex.C-2 after examination of the complainant, B/L color Doppler was suggested. As per Ex.C-6, the complainant was discharged from the hospital on 19.01.2022 at 04:15 PM and as per Ex.C-7, the complainant was discharged on 18.01.2022 at 10:46 AM and in the Final Diagnosis column, Deep Vein Thrombosis B/L Lower Limbs and Cellulitis B/L Lower Limbs are mentioned. But X-ray or any other test was not advised by the doctor and how did they reach to the conclusion without color Doppler or ultra sound that the patient is having Deep Vein Thrombosis B/L Lower Limbs and Cellulitis B/L Lower Limbs. As allured in Ex.C-1, no concessional rate was charged by the OPs. Discount of Rs.800/- was given only. On both the documents Ex.C-6 and Ex.C-7 the date of discharge and time of discharge is different. This is gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Alluring the person by issuing pamphlets for free check up and then charging the amount without proper tests is unfair trade practice.
7. On the other hand, the OPs have not come to contest the case. So, the version of the complainant remained un-rebutted and un- challenged, even then the same is required to glance very deeply. The allegation of the complainant is supported by his own affidavit Ex.CA and supported documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8.
8. So, from the overall circumstances and documents, the case of the complainant is fully proved and the complainant is entitled for the relief and thus, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OPs are directed to refund Rs.9200/- to the complainant and further OPs are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation including litigation expenses for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jaswant Singh Dhillon Jyotsna Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj
03.01.2023 Member Member President
