DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.754/2007
Sh. Syed Khalil Ahmad (now deceased)
Through his Lrs.
Smt. Rehana Beegum & Ors.
R/o J-76, Ashiana Complex,
Flat No.201, Abul Fazal Enclave,
Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025 ….Complainant
Versus
1. Dr. R. P. Tomar
Chief Administrative Officer
Vimhans Hospital, 1 Institutional Area,
Nehru Nagar, New Delhi
2. Vimhans Hospital,
1 Institutional Area,
Nehru Nagar, New Delhi ……Opposite Parties
Date of Institution : 11.07.07 Date of Order : 19.03.16
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
O R D E R
The case of the Complainant, in brief, is that he was under treatment of Dr. S. M. Tuli, Orthopedic Surgeon for his back pain in January, 2007. Various investigations such as MRI, Bone Density Test and Biopsy were done under the able guidance of the concerned doctors. As there was no relief from pain, he was admitted in OP hospital on 17.02.07. The doctor advised to keep him in ICU and he remained there till 18.02.2007. On 19.02.07, the concerned general physical advised the attendant of the Complainant that as there is no complication, he can take back the complainant to home but his son insisted that biopsy has to be done by Dr. S. M. Tuli and Dr. Varoon Kapoor. He was shifted to ward No. 111A for that purpose. On 20.02.07, he was shifted to ward but till evening no doctor/attendant attended him to check the BP and temperature. When the attendant went for dinner and came back he saw that the Complainant was being taken away by the ward boy for Echo Cardiography. The attendant objected that without their prior intimation, how could they take the patient as there was severe cold outside the ward but to no effect. The ward boy told that Dr. Sood, Cardiologist had called the patient for ECG. The Echo was done at around 9.30 p.m. Due to the taking of the complainant from the main building and bringing him back the complainant caught cold. When he came to his room, his condition was deteriorating and no doctor was available but at around 11:45 p.m. Mr. Mahesh, ward boy turned up for hair removing as the biopsy of the patient was to be conducted in the morning. The Complainant was feeling breathlessness and chest pain but no one turned up till 5 p.m. Only at about 5.30 p.m. the doctor turned up and the sister present there was helpless as no oxygen and nebulizers were available and he was shifted to ICU at 6.30 pm. He was shifted to ICU because of the negligence of OPs as there was no oxygen facility in the room. His attendant made a written complaint in the register available on the reception on 21.02.07 at about 6.45 a.m. The Chief Administrative Officer assured that he will take the action against the staff but till date no action has been taken so far. He was again shifted to ICU on 22.02.007 and thereafter in the general ward on 23.02.07 and finally discharged on 24.02.16. The Complainant has stated that despite his being the Sr. Citizen of the country the OPs did not give any concession for hospitalization and medicines as his condition had deteriorated because of the negligence of the OPs. He sent a written complaint to the OPs inter-alia asking for refund of the amount paid after 20.2.07 till 24.2.07. He received a reply from the OPs which was not convincing. After the report of biopsy he was suggested immediate treatment. Hence, there is a deficiency in service on the part of OPs. The Complainant has prayed as under:-
- Direct the OPs to pay Rs.25,000/- for the general damage and loss due to the negligence.
- Direct the OPs to pay Rs.16153/- as per bill after 20.02.07 as special damages.
- Direct the OPs to pay Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and harassment undergone by the Complainant.
- Direct the OPs to pay Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost.
OPs in their written statement have stated that OP No.1 is only an official functionary and the case is not maintainable against OP No.1. It is stated that after the stabilization of the medical condition of the Complainant on 20.02.07 and subsequent request by the attendant Bone Marrow Aspiration Biopsy was conducted on 21.02.07 by consultant cardiologist from out sourced agency (Vimhans being Neuro Science Hospital) which was prerequisite for biopsy and was done late in the evening in different block of the hospital premises connected by covered passage. In view of the aspiration biopsy shaving was done after Echo cardiography in the room only which was well heated with electric heaters. Due to existing Coronary Artery disease, hypertension, left ventricular failure his condition again became unstable and promptly attended. It is not correct that there was no oxygen and nebulizer in the room as all the nursing stations were equipped with adequate oxygen cylinders and nebulizers. OPs have further stated that on attendant’s request 15% discount was given on bed and consultation charges as chemist, diagnostic services being outsourced services. The bone marrow biopsy reveals the diagnosis of Multiple Myeloma, a malignant condition and he was referred to the AIIMS as the OP hospital does not provide chemotherapy for malignant cases. The allegations made by the Complainant are false and hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. The OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement of OPs. Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of OP No.1 has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OPs.
During the pendency of the complaint, the complainant died and his LRs have been substituted in his place.
Written arguments have been filed. We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.
Admittedly, the Complainant was admitted with the OPs on 17.02.07. After investigation, he was diagnosed for further treatment of Multiple Myeloma. When the Complainant was admitted in the OP hospital, the Complainant’s attendant made a complaint against the staff of OPs for negligence (copy annexure C-1 Colly). The OPs vide letter dated 20.03.07 informed the son of the Complainant that the Complainant was 73 years old and was an old patient of Coronary Artery disease with left ventricular failure chronic obstructive airway disease, Cardiac Asthma and hypertension for the last 4 years and he was admitted with the acute exacerbation; the condition was managed by the treating doctors and subsequent a biopsy was done which revealed multiple Multiple Myeloma (cancer disease of the bone) and they enquired into the matter and found that there was no lapse found on the part of the any person (copy Annexure C-2)
The Complainant has filed the complaint not pertaining to medical negligence on the part of OPs in providing the treatment but it relates to the administrative negligence on the part of OPs. If we weigh the evidence of both the parties on the scale, the scale certainly tilts against the complainant. Therefore, we hold that the Complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 19.03.16.
(NAINA BAKSHI) (N.K. GOEL) MEMBER PRESIDENT
Case No. 754/07
19.3.2016
Present – None.
Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, the complaint is dismissed. Let the file be consigned to record room.
(NAINA BAKSHI) (N.K. GOEL) MEMBER PRESIDENT
