DEEP NURSING HOME Vs. MANMEET SINGH MATTEWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against the order dated 31.01.2007 of the Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (hereafter, 'the State Commission') in complaint case no. 56 of 2006. By this order, the State Commission held the appellants (in F.A. no. 157 of 2007; hereafter, 'the appellants') guilty of medical negligence (deficiency in service) in treating the wife of the complainants/respondents 1 and 2 at the time of her delivery (which led to her untimely death) and allowed their complaint by awarding compensation of Rs.20,26,000/- and cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid equally by appellants 1 and 2. As Dr. G.S. Kochhar (representing appellant 1) and Appellant 2 were each insured with respondent 4 (the Oriental Insurance Company OIC) for Rs.10 lakh, the State Commission directed respondent 4 to pay Rs.20 lakh out of the compensation awarded and the appellants 1 and 2 to share the balance amount equally. For convenience, we refer to the parties in accordance with their status in F.A. no. 158 of 2007.

(2.) The respondents/complainants 1 and 2 alleged before the State Commission that the baby that Charanpreet Kaur, wife of complainant/respondent 1 delivered in Deep Nursing Home (hereafter, 'the Nursing Home') died soon after the delivery though there was no foetal distress till the time of delivery. They also alleged that Charanpreet was told about the death of her just-born baby as a result of which she went into shock. The Nursing Home was not fully equipped to handle emergency cases like those of atonic uterus that Charanpreet developed and undertake the requisite treatment, viz., uterine artery embolisation. The appellants had also not arranged for blood for transfusion before the delivery and even the blood group of the patient had not been ascertained beforehand. Appellant 2 took unduly long to decide the need for blood transfusion to Charanpreet and thereafter some time was taken to arrange the blood from outside. They (the appellants/opposite parties OPs) also delayed shifting Charanpreet to the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh (in short, "the PGI") to such an extent that on arrival there she was declared, "brought dead". Therefore, this was a clear case of medical negligence and deficiency in service. The appellant doctors fabricated the record of the patient's treatment to escape prosecution for gross negligence in treating her. For these allegations, respondent 1 sought total compensation of Rs.80 lakh on account of loss of income due to the death of Charanpreet Kaur, Rs. 10 lakh for the death of the baby, Rs. 5 lakh on account of mental agony and torture, Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.11,000/- towards litigation cost and interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of compensation and medical expenses from the date of actual payment till realisation.

(3.) (i) On the other hand, the appellants (OPs) pleaded that the deceased Charanpreet came to the Nursing Home for the first time on 10.11.2005, i.e., towards the end of her pregnancy term. Appellant 2 examined her and estimated the approximate date of delivery of the baby to be 02.01.2006. She was advised to continue the iron and calcium tablets that she was taking and also undergo cardiological check-up. Though Charanpreet informed Appellant 2 that the check up by the cardiologist showed that everything was normal, she did not produce the cardiologist's report before Appellant 2. On 16.12.2005, Charanpreet went to the Nursing Home for a routine check-up and was advised to continue her earlier medications.