Malkeet Singh complainant has filed this complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 against the opposite parties praying that opposite parties be directed to make payment/compensate him for medical negligence and deficient services of the opposite parties resulting in permanent physical disability, losing hope of getting job in armed forces and mental harassment to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/-, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that on 26.04.2014 he suffered a crush injury by thrasher machine to the four fingers of his left hand. He was not having any pre existing disease i.e. Diabetes/Hypertension/Asthma/Cardiovascular problem much less he was addicted to any smoking/Drinking/Alcohol Drugs. He was non-reactive of HIV/AIDS/HbsAg. After suffering injuries he was brought and admitted to Simran Hospital, opposite Crystal Farm, Batala Road, Gurdaspur. He was admitted in the Emergency ward of the Hospital where he remained under medical attention from 26.4.2014 to 30.04.2014 as indoor patient. During this period he was operated upon by the opposite party no.2 and steel rods/pins were put in the fractured phalanges in his four fingers of left hand. He was discharged on 30.04.2014 by opposite party knowing fully well that the condition of operated wounds were far from satisfactory and opposite parties further knew that this may lead to a permanent disability to his fingers. Despite his protest, opposite parties did not take any precautions much less to give proper treatment to his hand and opposite party no.2 kept on insisting that not to go for any second opinion/treatment and to continue the treatment line as is advised by opposite party no.2, because of the medical negligence and careless treatment of his fingers he had suffered irreversible permanent disability to the three fingers of his left hand resulting in the permanent disability, stiffening and deformity in his ring and large finger while his first has been operated surgically to remove his first phalange partly. He remained under active medical supervision of opposite parties for four months as outpatient but the infection of the fingers was not brought to control. Opposite parties have charged an exorbitant amount of Rs.2,50,000/- without any rhyme and reason but despite his protest, opposite parties did not issue any receipt of the payments made to the opposite parties. When he requested the opposite parties to handover the treatment file, opposite parties flatly refused to handover the file and it was only with the intervention of Medical Council Punjab that opposite parties gave a manipulated/fabricated/filed with afterthoughts and artificially prepared copy of admission file but again did not issue any receipt of the total amount received by the opposite parties although opposite parties have issued a provisional receipt of Rs.35,000/-. He was forced to get operated the distal phalange of the first finger of his left hand from another doctor who removed the part phalange resulting in the permanent disability deformity and impairment. After this he approached the office of Civil Surgeon about the condition of the fingers of his left hand who has certified that there is 20% disability of his left hand. He was meritorious student aspiring to join Armed/disciplined force but because of disability incurred by him because of the medical negligence and deficient service by opposite parties his hope of getting job in any of the forces has been brought down to 0% and as such he is handicapped for throughout his life resulting in the big loss of carrier and job which cannot be compensated otherwise. Thus there is negligence on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
3. Notice of the complaint was issued to opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is based on false and baseless allegation as such is liable to be dismissed. Complainant has paid Rs.35,000/- instead of Rs.2,50,000/-; the complaint is without any cause of action because there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the complainant has tried to create some loss to him due to disability caused to him due to alleged amputation of his index finger of his left hand and for that he has taken support of disability certificate and as per certificate he was claiming 20% disability whereas this alleged certificate is also not correct as per the Guidelines issued by Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment dated 18.2.2002 and according to that notification such type of amputation is only 5% disability. On merits, it was admitted that the complainant was operated in Hospital and procedure required as per protocol was followed and after operation post operative x-rays were given to the care taker of the patient/complainant showing the correct placement of K-Wires and it was further submitted that it was common in such type injuries patient suffers from post operation pains. Such type of injuries requires post operative Physio Therapy and rehabilitation and in the case in hand there is in no evidence these were taken care by the complainant after discharge. It has been further submitted that at the time of admission in Hospital was informed that the index finger of complainant was badly crushed as such it may not recovered and need imputation later on. However, complainant agreed with and his father gave consent for operation. During post operated period the index finger was getting Necrotic and as such at that time complainant was advised to imputation but he was not agreed for the same and as such without his consent no further operation was conducted and complainant wished to get discharged from hospital and accordingly he was discharged and after that he remained in hospital on basis of regular check-up and was provided proper medical aid. The pains in injury were due to reason of seriousness of injury and were properly taken care and required medicines were administered to complainant. It was denied that the residual deformity was result of negligent/careless/deficient service or due to injection and there was no such evidence in this respect. It was next submitted that opposite party no.2 himself was a qualified and renowned Orthopedic Surgeon with the experience of 9 years in the field and further more there was no doubt in respect of injuries of complainant and if complainant was having some problem then why he never approached any other Doctor after discharge from OP’s hospital on the other hand he preferred to remain outdoor patient of opposite party for long period of three months. It was further submitted that opposite parties did not charge complainant an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- rather during period as indoor patient he was charged for only Rs.35,000/- and for that complainant was having proper receipt of same but he has given false information in this respect. Thus, there is no negligence on the part of the opposite party. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to dismiss with costs.
4. Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, of Sh.Suba Singh Ex.CW-2 and of Sh. Balwinder Singh Ex.CW-3 alongwith other documents Ex.CW-2/A, Ex.C2 to Ex.C30 and closed the evidence.
5. Dr.Simranjit Singh opposite parties tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-6 and closed the evidence.
6. We have carefully examined all the documents/evidence as produced on records and have also judiciously considered and perused the arguments as duly put forth by the learned counsels along with the incidental scope of adverse inference for of some evidence (somehow) ignored to be produced here by the contesting litigants. We find that the prime dispute (giving way to the present complaint) has prompted at the complainant’s post-treatment result-retention of disability (permanent-handicap) to his left-hand index-finger crushed along with his other ‘3’ left-hand fingers caught in harvest-thresher in April’ 2014. The OP2 Doctor has duly admitted the factum of accidentally crushed hand-injury and the subsequent medical-treatment (including orthopedic surgery) by him at the OP1 Hospital but has duly proved having advised/ informed and also having procured medical-treatment-consent (Ex.OP5) of the complainant and his father pertaining to the seriousness of the ‘injury’ and apprehensive ‘imputation’ of upper-tip of the effected index-finger etc. The OP2 Doctor has further proved the contents of his rebuttal affidavit Ex.OP1 through the legal support of Ex.OP2 Govt. of India Notification on determination of physical-handicap(s) quantum(s) and medical/surgical synopsis (Ex.OP3, Ex.OP4 & Ex.OP6) illustrating medical/surgical science complexities pertaining to such-like injury-treatments etc.
7. We find further that the complainant has somehow failed to produce (on records) any direct cogent evidence or even otherwise any link evidentiary document supporting his prime allegation of expensive but ‘deficient’ surgery/ medical-treatment (of the ill-begotten but unfortunate) injury at the hands of the opposite party orthopaedic-surgeon/hospital. We find that the complainant has been admittedly (Ex.C13 & Ex.C14) diagnosed and advised of the severity and seriousness of the crush-injury at the start of medical-treatment/corrective-surgery and moreover after hospital-discharge on 30.04.2014 he was free to consult a surgeon of his choice and/or advice for 2nd opinion/treatment etc. The complainant has also failed to prove the alleged payment of Rs 2.50 Lac as the incurred medical expenses at the OP1 Hospital. Lastly, the subsequent medical treatment records at Abrol Hospital (Ex.C23 to Ex.C30) do not prove and/or even indicate of any lapse at the end of the OP1 Hospital/OP2 Surgeon. Further, we do not find any other cogent evidence (or even indicative/collateral one) except the filed in affidavits Ex.C1, Ex.CW-2 & Ex.CW-3 supporting the allegations as put forth in the present complaint and that turns these into mere ‘bald’ statements. And thus, we do not find any ‘evidence’ on record indicating the statutory infringement of consumer rights of the present complainant. Further, it is not understood as to how the OP2 Surgeon could have forced the complainant not to go in for the conduct of ‘medical treatment’ of his own choice and/or advice etc. There has been no ‘expert-opinion’ produced to authenticate the alleged ‘flaws’ in the medical advice/consultation/treatment etc. No hospital records of subsequent medical treatment were summoned or the attending doctor was produced/summoned as witness to prove the allegations of faulty medical treatment. The depositions in the absence of supporting evidence amount to nothing more than ‘bald’ statements and do not qualify for favorable statutory awards.
8. Finally, the complainant has produced one X-ray film (Ex.C22) along with the Disability Certificate (Ex.C21) with apparent tampered figure that somehow does not concur/commensurate with the Govt. of India Gazette Notification (Ex.OP2) on the subject matter. Moreover, it is not understood as to how it shall assist the complainant in his claim at the face of his very failure to prove statutory ‘infringement of his consumer rights’ at the hands of the titled opposite parties. In our considered opinion the ‘disability’ is attributable to ‘injury’ and to its ‘infliction’ and certainly not to its subsequent ‘medical-treatment’ and that too at the face of the ‘not-proved’ allegations of medical-negligence.
9. In the light of the all above, we do not see any merit in the present complaint and thus ORDER for its dismissal with however no orders as to its costs.
10. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
September 23,2016. Member
*MK*
