Present : Biswanath De …. President
The case of the complainant is that on 8.5.2013 the son of the complainant suffered injury in his right hand. Then, he came to Immambara Sadar Hospital, X-ray was done. Radius Ulna Fracture was detected. The injured was taken to the oP and Op made plaster over the fractured hand on 9.5.2013. On 14.5.2013 X-ray was done and doctor inspected the report and discharge the patient but the injured was suffering from pain. On 16.5.2013 he was taken to Chinsurah Immambara Hospital and thereafter he contacted Dr.Bhaskar Das Orthopaedic surgeon suggested for operation. Operation was done on 19.5.2013 and discharged on 22.5.2013. Accordingly, complaint has been filed by the complainant alleging that due to wrong treatment , the complainant’s son has been suffered and the wrong treatment has been imparted by the oP/doctor Subrata Das and for which complainant has suffered loss Rs.50,000/- including mental sufferings.
Op has contested the case by filing Written version denying inter alia all material allegations. The case of the oP is that he completed M.B.B.S. degree from R.G.Kar hospital and also completed six months house staff ship in Orthopaedic from said Medical college. Considering the financial condition of the complainant’s son this doctor Subrata Das extended treatment to the patient without taking any fees from the petitioner. The OP exercised his utmost skill and diligence for treatment of the petitioner’s son. So there is no negligency on the part of the oPs. Hence, the case should be dismissed.
The complainant filed photocopies of prescription dated 22.6.2013 and photocopies of X-ray report dated 14.5.2013 and photocopies of other some prescription of hospital. The complainant has also filed some other photocopies of later treatment. Complainant filed Evidence in chief and Written Notes of argument. Op also filed written version, Evidence in chief and Written Notes of argument.
POINTS FOR DECISION :
- Whether the complainant is a consumer ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the oP ?
- Whether the complainant/petitioner is entitled to get relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
All the points are taken together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
The complainant stated his case in Evidence in chief. It is admitted fact that Op treated the complainant’s son. Op advised for plastering. Op in his evidence stated that he treated the patient and the patient had fractured and for this reason patient’s fractured hand was plastered for keeping the alignment for some days, as the patient was of tender age. There is no other papers showing the expenditure of the complainant for the plaster or any original paper in support of the complainant’s case are produced before us. From the photocopy it appears that the complainant’s son was later treated and operation was done and those were photocopies. From the photocopies mainly two papers filed by the complainant failed to tie the OP/doctor with the alleged allegation of negligency. The doctor has discharged his duty as per his capability and infrastructure of the doctor himself. No other extraneous circumstances are present before us to find the total act of the oP/doctor. So the case fails for want of evidence and from the two photocopies in the name S.Das fails to prove any kind of case against the oP. So after going through the material in record we have no hesitation to hold that complainant fails to prove negligency of the doctor or conversely it can be stated that material on record fail to convince us regarding negligency of doctor and the doctor has acted with due care and attention in good faith and for the benefit of the complainant’s son. Accordingly we are of opinion that the case fails. Hence it is-
Ordered
That the C.C. case no. 111 of 2013 be and the same is dismissed on contest. No order as to cost.
Let a copy of this order be made over to the parties free of cost.
