1. This appeal is filed by N.K.P Salve Institute of Medical Sciences and Lata Mangeshkar Hospital of Nagpur, against the order passed by Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (now Commission) Nagpur, in consumer complaint no. RBT/CC/13/145, order dated 18/09/2018, holding the hospital responsible for the death of the wife of complainant Mr. Prakash Bhoyar due to wrong group blood transfusion on 13^th November 2011.
2. The brief facts of this appeal are as follows,

On 12th November 2011, the wife of respondent no.1, Shri. Prakash Domaji Bhoyar, deceased smt. Jaya Bhoyar age 44 years, was brought to the appellant hospital for a medical check-up regarding her complaints of dullness, general weakness, etc. After investigations, she was found to have severe anaemia with haemoglobin 2.7 Gm. %. She was shifted to the Intensive Care Unit and blood transfusion was advised. Urgently blood was arranged and transfused. Instead of the B RH positive blood group, the blood of a different group, AB - RH positive, that was issued by the blood bank was transfused. The patient, the wife of the complainant died after some time of the starting of blood transfusion, in spite of attempts to revive her by the team of doctors in ICU.

3. The husband of the deceased, smt. Jaya Bhoyar, filed a consumer complaint (RBT/ CC/ 13/145) before Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (now Commission) at Nagpur, alleging that there was medical negligence by the treating doctors at the appellant hospital, NKP Salve Institute of Medical Science and Lata Mangeshkar Hospital, when the blood of AB RH positive blood group was transfused to the patient instead of B RH positive blood group. After hearing both the parties and referring to the documents filed by both parties, learned District Consumer Forum decided the complaint in favour of the complainant, directing the present appellant to pay the compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the complainant within 30 days along with the litigation cost of Rs. 15,000/-.
4. The present appeal has been filed by the original opposite party against the impugned order, challenging the legality of the said order. We heard the submissions and arguments advanced by the learned advocate of the appellant and perused the record. We did not get the opportunity to hear the respondent due to his absence, in spite of due service of notice to the respondent, he was not represented after admission of this appeal.
5. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the grouping and cross matching was performed before transfusing the blood to the deceased Smt. Jaya. The report of blood grouping was AB RH positive dated 12^th November 2011. Report on Page 37 of appeal compilation. The blood was also cross-matched, and only then it was transfused. He invited the attention of the bench to the Inquiry Committee report filed by the appellant which exonerated the hospital doctors. Further, he referred to the judgment and order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal no. 6507 of 2009, Dr. Mrs. Chanda Rani Akhouri, and others vs. Dr. M. A. Methusethupathi and others. According to this citation, Hon’ble Supreme Court had expressed sympathy towards the complainant that she had lost her husband but she could not prove the medical negligence of the doctors. Referring to this citation learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the complainant was not able to prove the negligence of the doctors at the appellant hospital, hence he prayed for setting aside the impugned order passed by the district consumer forum allowing this appeal with cost.
6. We have gone through the documents on record specifically the copy of the medical record of the patient, smt. Jaya; shows that while admitting the patient on 12^th November 2011 at 11:30 pm, the admission notes written by the on-duty doctor mention that in the past history, “patient had severe anaemia two years back for which she was investigated completely. Her ANA was strongly positive. She received 3 units of B positive blood.” Hence it was known to the medical team treating the patient that the patient's blood group was B positive from the time of admission of the patient. Despite the same, the said information was not passed on to the Central Pathology Laboratory of the hospital. Even after AB RH Positive blood was received for transfusion, it was not noticed by the doctors in ICU and was transfused, with the resultant death of the wife of the complainant.
7. We have also perused the expert committee report. It is the report of the inquiry committee from Government Medical College, Nagpur; consisting of one chairman Dr. Jagdish Hedawoo, the Medical superintendent, and the three other expert members- doctors, the report is dated 13^th October 2016, the day on which the meeting of the expert committee took place. The first point noted in the report is as follows,

“1. If AB blood group blood is transfused to a person having B blood group, it results into a transfusion reaction called an immediate (intravascular) haemolytic transfusion reaction (IHTR). Anti A and Anti B antibodies are predominantly IgM and are capable of complement and causing destruction of red cells.”

8. In fact, the first point of the report shows that after transfusing AB blood group blood to a person having B blood group, there is an immediate severe reaction to it.” The said severe haemolytic reaction after a transfusion of blood of the wrong blood group, led to the death of the patient. This supports allegations of the respondent- original complainant. Further, the citation referred by the learned advocate is squarely not applicable to the present case.
9. We have gone through the impugned order. The said order has discussed medical as well as legal point of view with reference to multiple citations. This is well-reasoned order. Hence there is no reason to interfere with the said order.
10. In view of the above documents, findings, and submissions by the learned advocate of the appellant, we are of the opinion that the learned district forum has passed a well-reasoned order. Hence we pass the following order

ORDER

1. The appeal stands dismissed with costs quantified to Rs.25, 000/- to be paid by the appellant to the respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Copy of this order is to be given to all the parties free of cost.