A NARAIN RAO Vs. G RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The appellant Shri A. Narain Rao was the complainant before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. His complaint was registered in that Commission as C.D. No. 6/90 of 1990. The complaint was filed against the present respondent No. 1, Dr. G. Ramakrishna Reddy, who is Director of Jagadamba Nursing Home, Gandhinagar, Hyderabad and No. 2 Dr. K.V. Ramana Rao, who is Director of Nagarjuna Blood Bank, Secunderabad. Later on, on the application of the complainant, the State Commission had impleaded National Insurance Company Ltd. and United Insurance Company Ltd. as Nos. 3 & 4 but now they are not before us in this appeal. The State Commission vide order dated 22.6.1991 dismissed the complaint. It may be mentioned here that the complainant had also filed an application before the State Commission for impleading Dr. P. Ramachandra Murthy, Anaesthetist and Dr. P.V. Ramaraju Surgeon as opposite parties but the said application was also dismissed by the impugned order. Feeling aggrieved by the decision of the State Commission the appellant has filed this appeal.

(2.) The case of the complainant as gathered from the pleadings and evidence is that he is a retried Upper Division Clerk of the Central Government. He was 62 years old when he filed the complaint on 29th January, 1990 before the State Commission. He was suffering from some ailment for a period of about six months before he consulted Dr. B. V. Ramaraju, Urologist (RW-3) on 10th April, 1989 for an ailment of his prostate gland. Dr. Ramaraju advised surgery and recommended that the complainant should undergo seven pre-surgery tests (vide exhibit A- 1) to decide his fitness for surgery. The complainant underwent those tests and showed the reports to Dr. Ramaraju who after perusing them advised the complainant to get himself admitted in the Jagadamba Nursing Home, Gandhi Nagar, Hyderabad for surgery, which in medical parlance is referred to as 'TURP' (i.e. Trans Urethral Resection of prostate gland). Accordingly the complainant got himself admitted in the above Nursing Home on 15.4.1989 for the surgery which was to take place on the following date in the said Nursing Home. On the same date i.e. 15.4.1989 the Nursing Home prepared the complainant for surgery and obtained his blood sample for necessary tests and collected Rs.200/- from him towards the cost of the blood to be obtained for transfusion. While paying the amount the complainant had insisted that the blood be obtained only from the Institute of Preventive Medicine, Narayanaguda where donor's blood is most scrupulously subjected to all the required mandatory pathological tests to ensure that the blood is free from any infection or contamination. The Nursing Home promised to do so but it obtained the blood from a private blood bank namely Nagarjuna Blood Bank. The complainant came to know about that fact only on the date of discharge when the receipts Issued by the blood bank were handed over to him by the Nursing Home.

(3.) On 16th April, 1989 Dr. Ramaraju performed surgery upon the complainant. Simultaneously with the commencement of the surgery, blood transfusion was also stateted. Respondent No. 1 Dr. Ramakrishna Reddy was also present in the operation theatre while Dr. Murthy was Anaesthetist. It is the appellant's case that towards the end of the surgery, as the influence of anaesthesia almost waned, he heard the Anaesthetist, Dr. Murthy remarking that the tongue of the complainant had turned black and thereupon Dr. Ramaraju hurriedly gave instruction to stop the transfusion forthwith in view of the adverse reaction. The Nursing Home levied a charge of Rs. 4219.20 (Ex.A-16.) and discharged the complainant an 21st April, 1989.