SANJEEV RASTOGI Vs. DEEPAK SEHGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise from an order dated 16.07.2007 passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in complaint no.C-88/97. By the impugned order, the State Commission has partly allowed the complaint filed by Master Deepak Sehgal through his father and guardian Sh.R.K.Sehgal, alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party-Dr.Sanjeev Rastogi and has directed the opposite party-doctor to pay lumpsum compensation of Rs.1 lakh including cost of litigation.

(2.) Master Deepak Sehgal had filed the complaint before the State Commission through his guardian claiming a compensation of Rs.15,21,100/- alleging negligence on the part of the opposite party-Dr.Sanjeev Rastogi in performing the operation for removal of Cystic Lesion developed on the left knee of the complainant on 20.04.96. While doing so, he having damaged two nerves of the left leg due to a deep routed cut resulting in his permanent disability in normal functioning of his leg. The complaint was resisted by the doctor not disputing the factum of he having performed the above surgery but it was denied that there was any negligence on his part in conducting the said procedure. In regard to the specific allegation that he had damaged the nerves by a deep routed cut, the doctor tried to explain the same on the following premises:

(3.) At the trial of the complaint, the complainant mostly relied upon the opinion and medical record of the treatment at G.B.Pant Hospital after the surgery. The State Commission going by the respective pleas and on consideration of evidence and material produced on record came to conclusion that left posterior nerve of the complainant was damaged due to a deep routed cut, may be while removing a single nerve with a view to subsidize the pain which amounted to negligence on the part of the doctor. According to the State Commission, the complainant failed to establish the extent of disability. So, the complaint was partly allowed and limited compensation to the above extent was awarded.