VIJAY SINGLA Vs. SURINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SURINDER Kaur respondent had severe pain in her left lower molar (tooth). Accordingly, on 14.3.2004, the respondent along with her husband Surinder Pal Singh went to the hospital of the appellants. In the morning of 14.3.2004, she was medically examined by appellant No. 2 and she was asked to come on the next day. On 15.3.2004, the respondent again went to the hospital of the appellants. On that day, appellant No.2 without taking X -ray, extracted two lower left side molar (teeth) of the respondent and without her consent. Appellant No.2 also failed to provide proper and adequate post extraction medical aid to the respondent. As a result, the lower portion of the left side face of the appellant got numbed and her face also got disfigured/swollen.

(2.) IT was further pleaded that appellant No.2 had given full assurance to the respondent that she would recover soon. However, despite the medicines and treatment given by the appellant, there was no improvement in her condition for a period of about 3 months. She was feeling pain even at the time of filing of the complaint on 18.8.2004. Therefore, the appellants had committed medical negligence for extracting the teeth without investigating into the patients history, taking medical examination, diagnosis etc. and they had also failed to provide proper medical aid post operation. Hence, the complaint for compensation to the tune of Rs.90,000. Interest and costs were also prayed.

(3.) THE appellants filed the written reply. It was denied if the respondent was ever medically examined by appellant No.2 or if appellant No.2 had ever extracted lower left side molar (tooth) of the respondent. It was also denied if the respondent was ever given medical treatment by appellant No.2 or if the respondent had ever come to the hospital of the appellants or if she had paid any medical fee to the appellants. Therefore, the respondent was neither the consumer of the appellants nor the appellants had committed any medical negligence. Hence, it was prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs of Rs.20,000.