P PUSHPARAJ Vs. IRT PERUNDURAI MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant in C.O.P. No. 42/2001 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Erode is the appellant herein. His grievance was as follows: (a) He had fever, cough and weight loss and approached the opposite party hospital on 10.1.2000 and took treatment for 10 days and as there was no improvement, he was advised to get treated in Coimbatore Government Medical College Hospital that even there he did not get better. He went to Christian Fellowship Hospital in Oddanchatiram. There also he did not get relief. He got admitted in Coimbatore Ramakrishna Hospital and getting treated there. The opposite party had not studied the results of the tests taken on 10.1.2000 and had been careless and had negligently stated that he did not have T.B. that if the opposite party had diagnosed properly, the problem would not have aggravated and there would not have been threat to his life and there would not have been need to have treatment from 1.5.2000. Thus, there was deficiency in service, that for the treatment, he had spent Rs. 45,546 that the opposite party hospital was liable to pay the said amount with interest as also compensation. When the complainant had approached the opposite party on 10.1.2000 and 11.1.2000, though there were indications that his left lung had been affected, still the opposite party did not do proper tests to have it confirmed and also did not give treatment for T.B. as could be seen from the care records. There was suspicion that the complainant had T.B. and Pneumothorax and if only further tests had been done properly it would have come to their knowledge that the complainant had T.B. and this clearly amounted to negligence.

(2.) THE case of the opposite party was that the complainant had been given proper treatment at the opposite party hospital from 10.1.2000 to 4.2.2000 that the complainant did not follow the advice and instructions given by the opposite party that after 4.2.2000, he reported only on 1.5.2000 in a bad shape and condition. He was given good treatment and on 10.5.2000 he was sent to Kovai Medical College Hospital for heart and chest treatment but he did not heed to the advice of the opposite party but got treated in some other hospital and there was no deficiency in service.

(3.) BEFORE the District Forum, on the side of the complainant Exs. A1 to A17 were marked while on the side of the opposite party no document was marked. The doctors, who had treated the complainant at the opposite party hospital Dr. A. Selestin Raj Manohar and Dr. G.T. Manohar, were examined as also the complainant.