(1.) Parties by their Counsels. The grievance of the complainant is that his wife Kalpana was admitted to the Hospital of Dr. Chiniwala, when she was having some gynaec trouble, as bleeding was going on. Therefore, Dr. Chiniwala, the O.P. No. 2 referred this patient to the O.P. No. 1. It is stated by the complainant that this patient was treated by Mrs. Chiniwala, who was a Homeopathic practitioner. It is the case of the complainant that even though, this O.P. No. 1 was not qualified to treat the gynaec patient, still she has aborted the complainants wife. Her action in treating the patient has damaged the Uterus, which was required to be stitched. According to the complainant, after two days, the O.P. referred (sic) to available in the hospital where these opposite party were practicing. The complainant stated that without this the treatment was not possible as the facility was not available in the hospital of opposite parties in fact. It was obligatory on the part of the O.P. to refer this case immediately, to a Doctor, who was available at a distance of 14 K.mt. away, where the facilities to some extent was available, which has not been done by this respondent. On the other hand, the O.P. has taken the responsibility of treating the patient damaging the intestine and uterus causing her death. It is contended that the facilities were available at the hospital of O.P. No. 1 & 2 and that the labour room of this hospital was described by the Police authorities in the Panchanama. It has not reflected that there were any facility available in the labour room, or any nurse was available. Under these circumstances, the complainant contended that it was not proper on the part of this O.P. No. 1 and 2 to take risk to treat the patient.
(2.) It is further contended that when this patient was referred to 3rd Doctor, Dr. Hemant Bansali, who immediately stated that this was a case of laprotomy and therefore, it is required to be immediately taken cognizance as it was not proper on the part of the concerned Doctor to treat this patient. Again another Doctor, Dr. Karuwala, who has stated that after examination, he is reporting the matter to police as it was a criminal abortion and therefore, matter may be referred to the Police. The patient was thereafter, taken to Hinduja Hospital, as the respiratory system was not available with Dr. Karuwala, where she breathed her last on 10-7-91. Thus, this process started from 5th to 10th. The major period, according to the complainant was with the O.P. No. 1 & 2, who have taken 2 days and have damaged the uterus of the complainants wife which has resulted in her death. Therefore, he has contended that they are entitled for the compensation from O.P. No. 1 & 2 to the tune of Rs. 9 lakhs.
(3.) It is also contended that the O.P. No. 1 was not qualified to do the surgical job, especially in respect of the abortion etc. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Supreme Court, wherein it has been observed that the Doctors who are registered as Homeopath shall not practise in other faculty and therefore, they claim, an action on the part of the O.P. No. 1, in treating the patient and operating her was beyond her jurisdiction and she has exceeded her limit.