K.T. MARY Vs. VAYALALI PAVITHRAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are filed by defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No.542 of 1993 before the Court of Subordinate Judge, Thalassery against a decree directing them to pay compensation to the plaintiffs/contesting respondents for their alleged medical negligence. Though defendants 3 to 5, District Collector, Kannur, District Medical Officer, Kannur and Director of Health Services, Thiruvananthapuram were arraigned, no relief was granted against them by the court below.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiffs/contesting respondents. Learned Government Pleader is also heard.

(3.) On 19.01.1991 at about 5.00 p.m. plaintiffs' son Vibish, aged 8 years, was taken to the Primary Health Centre, Iritty (PHC) on account of excessive vomiting. The child was examined by the 1st defendant (appellant in A.S.No.441 of 1998), who was the Medical Officer on duty in the PHC at that time. 1st defendant attended on the ailing child and prescribed medicines including one injection, viz., Phenergan. 2nd defendant was the staff nurse in the hospital on duty on that day. As per the direction given by the 1st defendant, the 2nd defendant administered the injection Phenergan in high dose to the child. It is the allegation that after the injection, the child became unconscious. 1st defendant represented that the child was sleeping and asked the plaintiffs to take him home. Although they took the child home, at about 12 O' clock in the night, the child became delirious and again became unconscious after some time. He was taken to a nearby doctor, who advised the 1st plaintiff to take the child to a hospital. Shortly after reaching the Co-operative Hospital, Kannur the child died. It is the allegation that the 1st defendant without examining the child in detail prescribed medicines and due to the negligence on the part of the defendants, the child died. It is also alleged that over dose of injection caused the death of the child. It is further alleged that the 1st defendant did not diagnose the actual ailment of the child. 1st plaintiff filed a complaint before Iritty Police, Superintendent of Police, Kannur and other authorities. The District Medical Officer (DMO) conducted an enquiry and found the 1st defendant guilty of medical negligence. Hence the plaintiffs caused to issue lawyer notices to the defendants 1 and 2 and other defendants. Defendants 1 and 2 caused to send a false reply. Since they denied any negligence on their part, the suit is filed for compensation.