Tripura

West Tripura

CC/14/84

Sri Dhruba Deb - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director Sethi Diagnostic & Privat Limited And Other - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. P.R. Burman,Mr. R.Banik

18 Jan 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

    CASE NO:  CC-  84 of 2014

    Sri Dhruba Deb,
     S/O- Late Harendra Kr. Deb,
     Ramnagar Road No.10,
         Agartala, West Tripura.            ..........Complainant.
    
             ______VERSUS______

1. Sethi Diagnostic and Private Limited,
(To be represented by the Managing Director),
1 D, Diamond Harbor Road,
Behela Tram Depot, Kolkata- 700034.

2. The Secretary,
Department of Health,
Govt. of Tripura.

3. The Superintendent,
I.G.M. Hospital, Agartala.

4. Dr. L. K. Sinha,
M.D.(Radio-diagnosis),
C/o- Sethi Diagnostic and Medicare Pvt. Ltd.,
1 D, Diamond Harbor road, 
Behela Tram Depot, Kolkata- 700034.     …..........Opposite Parties.
            
                    __________PRESENT__________

 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SHR. B. BHATTACHARYA,
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

C O U N S E L

For the Complainant        : Sri P. Roy Barman and 
                      Sri Rahul Banik,
                      Advocates.
    
For the O.P. No. 2 & 3        : Sri Kushal Deb,
                       Advocates.    
          
For the O.P. No.1 and 4        : None appeared.    

                               
JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON: 18 .01.16

J U D G M E N T

        One Dhruba Deb filed the complaint U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging about medical negligence by Sethi Diagnostic & Private Limited and others. In the complaint it is said that C.T. Scan was done to petitioner in the SETHI Diagnostic & Medicare Pvt. Ltd., Unit, IGM Hospital and it was done by Radiologist, O.P. No.4, Dr. L.K. Sinha. It was reported that there was 'CE CT of thorax reveals thoracic lipoma' as per report. So, the complainant rushed to Mukandapur, Kolkata Hospital at Narayana Hrudayalaya. MRI was done and it was found that the CT scan report disclosing thoracic lipoma is totally baseless. On that baseless report he had to go to Kolkata and spent a huge amount and was under mental pain, anxiety. Therefore, he claimed Rs.50,000/- compensation also Rs.5,000/- cost.

Notice served upon the Sethi Diagnostic & Medicare Pvt. Ltd. also Radiologist, Dr. L.K. Sinha  but they did not appear. So, case against them proceeded exparte.

3.        Notice served upon The Secretary, Department of Health, Superintendent, IGM Hospital. O.P. No.2 and 3 have appeared and by filing written objection stated that they were not involved in the matter of treatment or doing scan on the chest of the petitioner. It is stated that the premisses were hired by Sethi Diagnostic on rent basis and in the matter of treatment and CT scan business, Ultrasonography they have no role. It was not a partnership business at all so claim against O.P. No.2 and 3 is not maintainable. 

4.        On the basis of contention raised by the parties following  points cropped up for determination.
        i) Whether the petitioner being a consumer suffered due to wrong diagnosis by CT scan and who are responsible for it?
        ii) Whether petitioner is entitled to get any compensation for deficiency of service?
        
5.        Petitioner produced photocopies of Medical Prescription, Report, Bills, Legal Notice, Air Tickets etc. marked and exhibited as Exhibit-1 Series. 
        Petitioner also produced statement on affidavit of one witness. 
    
6.        Respondent Secretary, Govt. of Tripura, Superintendent of IGM Hospital produced one witness.
        
7.        On the  basis of evidence on record we shall now determine the points.

        FINDINGS  &  DECISION  OF  POINTS  NO.1  AND  2:-
        
We have gone through the Exhibit- 1 Series documents. Prescription issued by Arunabha Dasgupta who suggested cvs Sr2. Prescription of Ashim De also produced. The report of L.K. Sinha, Radiologist in original also produced as Exhibit-1 series. In that  it is clearly written that Impression with CE CT on thorax reveals thoracic lipoma as  reported by attending doctor of Sethi Diagnostic and Medicare Pvt. Ltd. He has given this report. The original report of Narayana Hrudayalaya Hospital RTIICS also filed. Prescription also filed. From the report of multi-specialty Health Care Institute Narayana Hrudayalaya Hospital it is found that thoracic skeleton and thoracic soft tissue shows no abnormalities. CT scan brain was also done. MRI of chest was done. It was all normal. From careful scrutiny of investigation report of Narayana Hrudayalaya and prescription it is found that petitioner was not a patient of thoracic lipoma as revealed  from the report of Dr. L.K. Sinha  of Sethi Diagonostic and Medicare Pvt. Ltd. Such report given by the radiologist is totally baseless and wrong. But the Secretary, Department of Health, Superintendent, IGM Hospital have no role in respect of diagnosis done by the O.P. No.1 and 4. The premisses was given to the Sethi Diagnostic and Medicare Pvt. Ltd.  for the purpose of diagnosis on payment of fees. The Government authority was not involved in the business and treatment matter. Only giving the premisses on rent basis or otherwise can not  put any liability on the house owner. So, in no way O.P.  No.2 and 3 were involved and had any liability.

But from the analysis of the evidence and documents submitted it is clear that Sethi Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd. and Dr. L.K. Sinha who had given the wrong report and caused much harassment and agony to the petitioner is fully liable. They can not avoid their liability as because for their fault petitioner suffered mental agony and had to go to Kolkata for MRI and other investigation. After receipt of the notice and complaint O.P. No.1, Sethi Diagnostic and Medicare Pvt. Ltd. and Dr. L.K. Sinha did not appear to refute the allegation about such unfair trade by them on medical side. Therefore, we are of the clear view that O.P. No.1 and 4 are liable and under obligation to compensate the petitioner who suffered mental agony and also had to spend a huge amount for investigation in Kolkata. This kind to wrong investigation causes much pain. So, we hold them liable and direct both O.P. No.1, Sethi Diagnositc and Medicare Pvt. Ltd. and L.K. Sinha, M.D. Radiologist to pay compensation amounting to Rs.40,000/- the cost of investigation done at Kolkata for mental agony another Rs.15,000/-. 

10.        We therefore, direct them to pay Rs.55,000/-(Rupees fifty five thousand) to the petitioner, Dhruba Deb along with a cost of the case. Both O.P no 1 & 4 are made jointly and severally responsible for payment. The compensation is to be paid within 2(two) months failing which it will carry interest @ 9% P.A.

11.        Send copy of the judgment to O.P. No.1 and 4 and also to the petitioner.        

12.                  A N N O U N C E D

 

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SHRI. B. BHATTACHARYA,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  AGARTALA, WEST TRIPURA.