Filed On:04.06.2008
Disposed On:07.07.2015
THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, THIRUVALLUR
PRESENT . THIRU. S. PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M : PRESIDENT
TMT. S. SUJATHA, B.SC., : MEMBER-I
THIRU. V. VENKATESAN, M.A.B.Ed., MBA. M.PHIL.B.L., : MEMBER-II
Tuesday, the Day of 7th July-2015
C.C.NO. 43/2008
T. Selvaraj
S/o. R. Thiraviyam
No. 4, Subiksha Apartments
St. Mary’s School Road,
Sembium, Chennai – 600 011. …Complainant
-Vs-
1. St. Antony’s Hospital
Madhavaram, Chennai - 6000 60
2. Dr. Amudha
C/o. Antony’s Hospital
Madhavaram, Chennai – 600 060
3. Dr. L. Lakshmanan Saravanan
C/o. St. Antony’s Hospital
Madhavaram, Chennai -600 060. …Opposite Parties
Counsel For Complainan : Mr. A.R. Poovannan, Advocate
Counsel For Opposite Parties : Exparte
This Complaint is coming upon before us finally on 30.06.2015 in the presence of Mr. A.R. Poovannan, Advocate on the side of the complainant and non appearance the Opposite Parties and they were Set Exparte and upon hearing arguments on the side of the Complainant and perused the documents and evidence, this Forum delivered the following,
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY TIHIRU. S. PANDIAN, PRESIDENT
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.
This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties U/S 12 Consumer Protection Act 1986, seeking direction to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- for the deficiency of service during surgery done for the wife of complainant caused death of his wife and thereby suffered mental agony.
The Brief facts of the Complaint are as follows:
1. The Complainant’s Wife Mrs. S. Mala, age about 33 years, had gone to the first opposite party Hospital for a check –up of a fibroid in her uterus/womb and under the advice of the second opposite party, she was admitted in the first opposite party Hospital on 06.06.2007 at 09.00 A.M. She was taken to operation theatre at 9.00A.M on the next day Viz. On 7.6.2007 for removing the said fibroid. The said operation had been fixed only for an hour but she was not brought out of the operation theatre till 4.00A.M. on that day. So, the complainant was unrest till 4.P.M. and when he enquired about the operation, he was told that the patient had cardiac arrest within 10 minutes after starting of the operation and due to that there was low pressure and also no supply of oxygen to the brain and consequently she had myoclonic fits and was unconscious. Under this circumstance, the complainant became restless and anxious about the health conditions of his wife Mrs. S. Mala, and had repeated enquiries with the opposite parties about her health. His anxious moments and restlessness, made the opposite parties to shift the patient from the first opposite party hospital at 9.30P.M. on 7.06.2007 and was admitted in Apollo Hospital at poonamallee High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai. At Apollo Hospital, the said patient was provided with ventilation and life support through supply of oxygen so as to save the life of the said patient. However, there was no improvement on her health condition and she continued to be in the stage of coma. The complainant understands and believes the same to be true that the opposite parties have not taken any steps to cure the cardiac arrest which occurred within 10 minutes after starting of the operation and the complainant also understands the first opposite party has no facility in their Hospital to cure the cardiac arrest and further understands and believes the same to be true that if cardiac arrest occurred during operation, the operation must be stopped immediately and cardiac arrest must be cured first and in case, the first opposite party has no facility to cure the cardiac arrest, it is opposite party’s bounden duty to shift the patient to another Hospital where the said facility would be available. But, without following that course of action, the opposite parties have continued with the operation till 4.00 P.M. and only after seeing the complainant’s anxious moments and restlessness, the opposite parties shifted the patient to the above said Apollo Hospital, that too, after 9.30 A.M. on 07.06.2007.
2. The complainant understands and believes that no surgery/operation is required for a fibroid of a size of 4 centimeters for a patient of 33 years. The Opposite parties have not only removed the uterus/womb of the patient but have also removed her ovaries and its tubes without the complainant’s consent and knowledge. The medical expenses and charge is per day at Apollo Hospital was Rs.20,000/- and the complainant’s wife was in the said Hospital for about 8 days. The Complainant understands that the first opposite party has paid a Sum of Rs.25,000/- out of the said 1,50,000/- to the said Apollo Hospital by way of a cheque bearing No. 545353, Dt. 12.06.2007 drawn on union bank of India, Madhavaram branch, Chennai which was come to the complainant’s knowledge only at the time of discharging the patient from the said Hospital. However, the complainant urges to add that he has paid a sum of Rs.10000/-, by cash to the first opposite party as advance and deposit to the first opposite party at time of her admission in the first opposite party Hospital. The Complainant gave a complaint about the deficiency of the service rendered by the opposite parties to the Inspector of Police, M-1 Police Station, Madhavaram, Chennai-600 060 and the said authority did not take any action against the opposite parties in spite of the complainant made several attempts with the said Police to take at least criminal action against the opposite parties but was ended in vain. Hence, the complaint.
3. The opposite parties initially represented through the counsel and in spite of several and sufficient time and opportunities was given, neither the opposite parties nor the counsel appeared or to come forward to file written version in order to proceed trail. Subsequently, while the petition in CMP43/2010, filed by the complainant for obtaining the expert opinion, this forum in the interest of the natural justice, ordered to send notice to the opposite parties. Even then the opposite parties have not utilized the same and to raise any objection on the Expert medical opinion. From these, in spite of sufficient time given, the opposite parties not appeared, and op-1 to op-3 were set Exparte. It is a long pending case. Hence, this forum wants to decide this case on merits.
4. In order to prove the case of the complainant the proof affidavit is filed as his evidence and ExA1 to A6 are marked.
5. At this juncture, the Vital point to be determined before this forum is,
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
- To what other relief the complainant is entitled to?
6. Written arguments submitted on the side of the complainant and also oral arguments adduced.
7. Point No.1:- As per the case of the complainant is, that when the wife of the complainant namely Mrs. S. Mala went to the hospital of the opposite party -1, for check up of a forbid in her uterus and as per the advice of the opposite party-2, she was admitted in the said hospital on 6.6.2007 for surgery and she was taken to the operation theater on 7.6.2007 at 9A.M. and there was no information till 4 P.M. Atlast, the complainant was informed that immediately after 10 minutes of commencing the operation, the complainant’s wife developed with a cardiac respiratory problem and not recovered from the unconsciousness. Ex.A1 to A3 are the payment receipt of fees issued by the opposite party-1 and Ex.A4 is the discharge summary issued by the opposite party-3. Further, it was learnt that there was a different brain injury and osmotic to the patient during operation. The opposite party have not cared for and not made any attempt to cure the same. But the opposite parties have not only removed the uterus/womb but also removed the ovaries and its tubes without the consent and knowledge of the complainant.
8. It is further learnt from the proof affidavit, that the opposite party’s doctor decided to shift the complainant wife to Apollo Hospital and there was no improvement and went to coma. At that time, the opposite party-1 has paid without the knowledge of the complainant a sum of Rs. 25,000/- inform of the Apollo Hospital by means of cheque No.545357, UBI date 12.6.2007 is marked as Ex.A5 and after that since the complainant is unable to bear the expenses at the Apollo Hospital, he admitted his wife in the Stanly hospital, Chennai and there was also no improvement and lastly she was died on 4.11.2007. The discharge summary issued by the Apollo Hospital is marked as Ex.A6. The Certificate issued by the Stanly hospital is marked as Ex.A15 and Ex.A16 is the death certificate of the complainant ‘s wife Mrs. S. Mala.
9. The complainant further narrated in his evidence that the death of his wife is solely caused due to the medical negligence of the opposite parties and not otherwise and therefore there is a gross deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and hence, ExA7 complaint was given to the Inspector of Police M1 Police station, Madhavaram, Chennai, and the acknowledgement of the M1 Police station is marked as Ex.A8 but no action taken against the opposite parties. Then, the complainant issued the first legal notice Ex.A9, to the Opposite parties and Ex.A10 is the acknowledgement for the same by opposite party-1. Again Ex.A11, the second legal notice was issued to the opposite party -1 to opposite party -3 and acknowledgement of opposite party 1 and opposite party 3 are marked as Ex.A12 and Ex.A13 respectively. The returned cover of opposite party-2 is marked as Ex.A14. But, the opposite parties neither settled the amount nor sent any reply. Therefore the complainant had knocked the door of this forum.
10. At the outset, despite of the opposite party were set exparte, the complainant filed the petition in CMP 43 of 2010 for seeking to obtained the Expert opinion from the competent authority for the cause of death of his wife Mrs. Mala and the same was allowed and taken necessary steps for getting expert medical opinion. In continuation, the Medical Report was issued by the Medical Board, Directory Social Obstruction Institute of social obstruction and government Kasturba Gandhi hospital for women and children- 600 007 and received by this forum. In this regard, no objection recorded on the side of the complainant and the opposite party’s not come forward to raise any objection. Therefore, the said medical report can be fully taken into consideration.
11. On perusal of the Medical Report, the Medical Board after due perusal of Ex.A4, Ex.A5 & Ex.A6, it has opined that obviously the said complication occurred in the case of the complainant’s wife, were not anticipated adequately with full preparedness and tackled inadequately leading to cardiac arrest and its resultant neurological damage. From the above expert opinion, it is crystal clear that the non attendance and negligence of the first opposite party and its doctor opposite party 2 and opposite party3 the complainant’s wife was seriously affected and dead. Therefore, it goes without saying there is a gross medical negligence in the case and the same has been proved by the complainant on the available documents and evidences. While so, the opposite parties have not chosen to appear and to rebut the evidence of the complainant. Therefore, it is pertinent to note that there is no contra evidence before this forum. Hence this forum has no hesitation to hold that the medical negligence and the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties have been proved beyond any doubt. Thus the point no.1 is answered accordingly.
12. Point no 2&3 In view of the conclusion arrived in the point no.1 and considering that the wife of the complainant who is aged only 33 years lost her life by leaving two children because of the negligence committed by the opposite party 2&3 who are attached with opposite party -1’s hospital, it can be easily to decide that the complainant is entitled for reasonable compensation with interest and the cost. Thus these points are answered accordingly.
In the Result, this complaint allowed in part. Accordingly the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only) towards compensation to the complainant with interest at a rate of 10% per annum from the date of the complaint to till the date of order and a cost of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only).
The above amount shall be payable within one month, from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the said amount shall carry an interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of payment.
Dictated directly by the president to the Steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the president and pronounced by us in the open forum on this the 7th July – 2015.
Sd/-*** Sd/-*** Sd/-***
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
List of Complainant Documents:
Ex.A1 Dt.26.05.2007 - Xerox Copy of receipt for Rs. 550/- issued by the
first opposite party
Ex.A2 Dt.06.06.2007 - Xerox Copy of receipt for Rs. 10,000/- issued by
the first opposite party
Ex.A3 Dt.06.06.2007 - Xerox Copy of receipt for Rs. 415/- issued by the
first opposite party
Ex.A4 Dt.07.06.2007 - Discharge summary issued by the third opposite
party
Ex.A5 Dt.12.06.2007 - Cheque No. 545351, Union Bank of India,
Madharavaram Branch in favour of Apollo Hospital
Ex.A6. Dt.14.06.2007 - Discharge summary issued by Apollo Hospitals
Ex.A7 Dt.18.06.2007 - Complaint given by the complainant to Inspector of
Police, M-1 Police Station, Madhavaram, Chennai – 600 060
Ex.A8 Dt.18.06.2007 - Acknowledgement given by the M-1 Police Station
Ex.A9 Dt.06.08.2007 - Lawyer’s notice to the opposite parties
Ex.A10 Dt.09.08.2007 - Acknowledgment by Opposite party -1
Ex.A11 Dt.01.10.2007 - Lawyer’s second notice (copy)
Ex.A12 Dt.10.10.2007 - Acknowledgement by Opposite party -1
Ex.A13 Dt.10.10.2007 - Acknowledgement by Opposite party-3
Ex.A14 Dt.10.10.2007 - Xerox Copy of returned cover opposite party-2
Ex.A15 Dt.04.11.2007 - Doctor certificate
Ex.A16 Dt.27.11.2007 - Death certificate of Mala (deceased)
List of Opposite party Document: -Nil-
Sd/-*** Sd/-*** Sd/-***
MEMBER – I MEMBER –II PRESIDENT
