NARAYANA K SWAMY Vs. A NAZIR AHMED KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of one and the same judgment rendered by the trial Court in O. S. No. 7691/91. The appellants herein were the defendants 3 and 4 respectively before the trial Court. The suit filed by the plaintiff claiming damages following the death of plaintiff's wife Smt. Khateeja Yasmeen on account of negligence of the appellants came to be allowed and the trial Court awarded a compensation of rs. 1,00,000/- and put the liability jointly and severally on the appellants.

(2.) THE facts briefly stated are to the effect that the plaintiffs who are the husband and minor children of deceased Khateeja Yasmeen filed the suit in question claiming compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- on the ground that khateeja Yesmeen died while she was under treatment in the third respondent's hospital and it is the case of the plaintiff that the deceased was taken to the hospital on 31-3-1988 with severe bursting headache and vomiting. The first plaintiff-husband was asked to get a CAT and Contrast Scan done immediately in a private nursing home as the duty doctor was not available on account of general holiday. The husband agreed to the said suggestion, but he was not provided with ambulance though requested by him. Nevertheless, the patient was taken to Jubilee Nursing Home and was then brought back to NIMHANS. The 4th defendant who is one of the appellants herein was in-charge of the patient and had directed that angiogram test has to be conducted. But no such angiogram test was conducted for various reasons to which reference would be made at a later stage.

(3.) HOWEVER, lumber puncture test was carried out and it revealed the presence of disease known as SAH (Subarachnoid haemorrhage ). The patient was put under lumber puncture on more than one occasion and in fact, three times lumber puncture was carried out and the presence of SAH was noted. Thus, according to the plaintiff, though lumber puncture is not conducted within short intervals, the patient was put under the said test three times, whereas angiogram test was to be conducted at the earliest, but the said test was not done. This according to the plaintiff led to the patient going into coma stage with other complications and right from the date the patient was admitted to the hospital, till 5-4-1988, no angiogram test was conducted.