LAWS(NCD)-2003-6-45

GURUDAS S MORAJKAR Vs. SEEMA KHARANGATE

Decided On June 23, 2003
Gurudas S Morajkar Appellant
V/S
Seema Kharangate Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This complaint has been filed by Shri Gurudas S. Morajkar alleging negligence and deficiency in service rendered by the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 resulting in the death of his wife Smt. Sunita G. Morajkar. The complainant claimed compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- on account of deprivation of earnings as well as mental agony.

(2.) Briefly stated facts as stated in the complaint are as under : (a) Late Smt. Sunita was getting bleeding from the uterus and approached the opposite party No.1 for treatment. A urine test done in the month of November, 2000 showed that late Sunita was also afflicted with high blood sugar. Late Sunita was admitted in the opposite party No.2-Hospital on 5.12.2000, on the advice of the opposite party No.1 that a major surgery of Abdominal Hysterectomy needed to be performed. (b) The O. P. No.1 commenced treatment to reduce the blood sugar in preparation for the surgery. (c) Late Sunita was taken to the Operation Theatre on 8.12.2000 at 8.30 a. m. and was brought out at 11 a. m. in an unconscious state. The opposite party No.1 informed that late Sunita had suffered a Cardiac arrest during surgery and that she had been revived after administering Cardiac massage. She further informed the complainant that late Sunita would have to be shifted to G. M. C. Hospital, Bambolim for further treatment since the opposite party No.2-Hospital was incapable of managing the critical condition. (d) Acting upon the advice of the opposite party No.1, the complainant shifted late Sunita to G. M. C. Hospital, Bambolim on 8.12.2000 at 5.30 p. m. Late Sunita never came out of her coma during her hospitalisation, at Bambolim and expired on 13.12.2000. (e) The complainant alleged absolute negligence, non-professional attitude and carelessness on the part of the opposite party No.1.

(3.) Upon being noticed, the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 filed their reply along with Annexure of case papers. The opposite party No.3 filed its reply through its Senior Divisional Manager.