V.K.SURI Vs. SUSHMA AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS First Appeal has been filed by Shri V.K. Suri, complainant before the State Commission and Appellant herein being aggrieved by the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission ') which has rejected his complaint of medical negligence against Dr.Sushma Aggarwal and Dr.Arun Gupta, Respondents No.1 and 2 respectively.

(2.) IN his complaint, Appellant had contended that his wife delivered a male child at Shubham Hospital, New Delhi and the delivery was handled by Respondent No.1 who was a Gynecologist and thereafter by Respondent No.2, a Pediatrician. Because of the wrong treatment and gross negligence on the part of Respondent/doctors the baby was severely retarded both mentally and physically. Appellant specifically stated that his wife who was suffering from fever in her 32-34 weeks of pregnancy had visited Respondent No.1 who failed to conduct a basic test known as Torch Test which would have clearly indicated the nature of the pre-natal viral infection and whether it had infected the foetus. INstead the patient was given only paracetamol to check the fever. The baby was born after 36 weeks of gestation i.e. 4 weeks before the full gestation period with symptoms of the present disease but he was not given the required medical treatment at birth as a result of which, as per the certificate issued by the All INdia INstitute of Medical Sciences(AIIMS) in 1996, he has cerebral palsy with spastic tendencies, mental retardation and 90% permanent physical impairment. The certificate from AIIMS specifically stated that the perinatal viral infection was the cause of this condition. If due medical treatment had been given at birth instead of just tonics and vaccines by Respondent No.2, Appellant contended that the extent of disability would not have been so extensive. Appellant, therefore, approached the State Commission on ground of medical negligence and requested that Respondents be directed to pay him Rs.15 lakhs as compensation for mental agony and to enable him to provide the necessary treatment for his child.

(3.) COUNSEL for Respondents on the other hand stated that both Respondents are well qualified doctors with specializations in Gynecology and Pediatrics respectively. Respondent No.1 took due care during the pregnancy and right in the beginning various tests including ultrasound were conducted which could have revealed some growth problem but not spastic tendency or cerebral palsy because spastic tendencies cannot be diagnosed in a foetus. The fever which occurred in the 32-34 weeks of the pregnancy in the mother cannot cause foetal malformation which can occur if the mother contracts an infection in the first trimester i.e. 12 weeks of the pregnancy while Since an ultrasound had confirmed that the foetus was small for date, as per medical practice, Respondent planned to induce labour but before this could be done, the Appellant 's wife herself delivered one month prematurely with only one hour of labour pains. On birth, the infant was in respiratory distress because the umbilical cord was bound thrice round his neck and he had passed and swallowed meconium in the womb. He was immediately resuscitated, stabilized and put in intensive care and prescribed antibiotics and treated with other medication for mild jaundice and discharged thereafter in a stable and satisfactory condition. It was the Appellant and his wife who failed to heed correct medical advice during subsequent follow-up visits by not agreeing to hospitalization of the baby and also not giving antibiotics for the prescribed period.