Andhra Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/670/08

Ms A.P. Vaidya Vidhana Parishad - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt.Kunja Kondamma - Opp.Party(s)

Dr.S.A. Waheed Shahbaz

29 Sep 2008

ORDER

 
First Appeal No. FA/670/08
(Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. of District Visakhapatnam-II)
 
1. Ms A.P. Vaidya Vidhana Parishad
Area Hospital, Bhadrachalam-507 111. Khammam District.
Khammam
Andhra Pradesh
2. Ms Health, Medical and Family Welfare Dept.
Government of Andhra Pradesh, State Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Hyderabad
Andhra Pradesh
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Smt.Kunja Kondamma
Post Aswapuram-507 116, Khammam Dist.
Khammam
Andhra Pradesh
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

BEFORE THE A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

ATHYDERABAD.

 

F.A. 670/2008 against C.C. 130/2005, Dist. Forum, Khammam

 

Between:

 

1. Medical Superintendent

A.P. Vidya Vidhana Parishad

AreaHospital

Bhadrachalam-507 111

Khammam Dist.

 

2. The Principal Secretary to Govt.

Health, Medical & Family Welfare Dept.

Government of A.P.

Secretariat,Hyderabad.                                                                                               

Smt. Kunja Kondamma

W/o. Kondala Rao

Aswapuram Post

Khammam Dist.-507 116.          

Counsel for the Appellant:                         S.A.

Counsel for the Resps:                               

 

QUORUM:

 

              

&

                                     

 

 

MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND EIGHT

 

 

 

Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Justice D. Appa Rao, President)

 

                                                          

         

 

 

         

 

 

 

 

The case of the complainant in brief is that    JayabharathiMaternityHospital, Bhadrachalam.   They informed    10.00 a.m. she admitted inAreaHospital, Bhadrachalam the 1st            The family planning operation was conducted.           12.00 noon   12.30 p.m. When questioned, they came up with false version that the boy  

 

 

 

Since she convinced with the version of the doctors,   

 

Appellant No.1/Opposite Party No. 1 filed counter adopted by                              

 

was      There was ample stock.         

 

            filed affidavit evidence of Dr. S. Jayarami Reddy, Medical Superintendent       

 

 

 

 

                 75% of neonatal deaths occur due to low birth weight  

 

           st        VikrantScanningCenter, Bhadrachalam, taken on the very same day. 

 

                 planning 

 

performed to her successfullyAreaHospital.        Because of sudden lung infection even though the Paediatrician was attending with all care, the baby expired for the reasons beyond his control. “

 

Ex. B8 is the   

 

Newborn: 

Classification based on Gestational Age:

1.    Pre-term baby born before 37 weeks of gestation.

2.    Term baby, born between 37 and 42 weeks of gestation

3.    Post-term baby, born beyond 42 weeks of gestation.

 

Classification based on Weight:

 

1.    Low

2.    Very low birth weight (VLBW) baby, less than 1500g

3.    Very 

4.    In India

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The appellant asserts that sine the baby boy was a pre-term baby and low     monitoring of the babies.  

Coming to the facts,            

Obviously, having satisfied with all the required tests, caesarean         The complainant 

 

 

It is positive case of the appellant that immediately after delivery the baby was shown to                          the person/employee maintaining the supply of Oxygen cylinders. when she complained about non-providing of Oxygen to the baby.    

 

 

 

 

 

days less     best medical care the boy could not survive.  

 

The other contention that was taken was that the treatment was free of charge, and no RW1 the Superintendent of the hospital admitted that “it is true that we have collected user charges from you     Subsequently, the Government by issuing G.O. Ms. No. 163     

 

The learned counsel for the appellant relying a decision       

 

 

To sum up, the complainant was admitted in the government hospital on 10.6.2004 along with ultra sound scan report wherein it is revealed the weight of child is 2838g,                

 

In the result the appeal is dismissed with costs computed at Rs. 2,000/-. 

 

 

PRESIDENT                                    

         

 

 

 

*pnr

 

 

 

“CORRECTED – O.K”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.