MURLIDHAR R CHHABRIA Vs. BREACH CANDY HOSPITAL TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal is filed by the Complainant under Section-19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Order passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the "State Commission") in Complaint No.06/95 dated 28.03.2012.

(2.) Appellant/Complainant is a senior citizen, who was admitted in Respondent No.1/Opposite Party No.1 Hospital in Mumbai on 18.09.2005 for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG). Respondent No.2/ Opposite Party No.2 conducted the operation on 20.09.2005. However, on 28.09.2005 as blood was found oozing from his chest, re-suturing was done on 01.10.2005. After re-suturing, the Complainant was shifted to the ICU. According to the Complainant his wife noticed that his left palm and fingers were got burnt. The doctor who examined him stated that his hand probably got burnt during re-suturing process. Operating doctor i.e. Respondent No.2 examined the patient on the next day and cleaned and dressed the blisters on the Complainant's hand. The Complainant alleged that he was informed by Respondent No.2 that the hand must have been got burnt due to the heater placed in the operation theatre. The Complainant was discharged on 12.10.2005 and a bill of Rs.6,49,704/- was raised against an initial bill of Rs.3,50,000/-. A Complaint was lodged with Respondent No.1/Opposite Party No.1 alleging medical negligence on their part. The Complainant further submitted that Respondent No.3/Opposite Party No.3 performed surgery on 09.11.2005 on the thumb and ring finger, but to his surprise, found that Respondent No.3 amputated his middle and little fingers and he was informed that this was due to development of gangrene. He was later discharged on 30.11.2005. Being a diamond broker and expert in assortment of diamonds, the absence of fingers was not only a loss of body part but would also hamper his income earning capacity. The damage to his fingers and consequently his business made the Complainant issue a legal notice to Respondent No.1/Opposite Party No.1. A Complaint case for medical negligence was filed with the following prayer: -

(3.) The case was contested by the Opposite Parties who denied all the allegations made in the Complaint. The Complainant was admitted for CABG operation which was carried out with his full consent with the attendant risks involved. The Patient was also having a history of long standing diabetes, which finally led to Tropical Diabetic Hand Syndrome (TDHS.) Patients with diabetes are immunologically impaired to combat infections. It was further submitted that Breach Candy Hospital/Respondent No.1 was equipped with warm air blowers, which automatically cut off at 420 C. No heaters were used in the operation theatre or in the ICU in the Respondent Hospital. It could not be the case that the hand of the Complainant accidentally touched the heater, resulting in burning of his hand during the re-suturing process. The symptoms of heater burn and TDHS are similar and could be distinguished only by histopathological analysis and not clinically. Expert opinion was filed to show that TDSH results in burning of hand lead to gangrene and therefore, second grafting was suggested.