LAWS(NCD)-2004-2-202

POONGUZHALI Vs. RUWSEC HEALTH CENTRE

Decided On February 12, 2004
Poonguzhali Appellant
V/S
RUWSEC HEALTH CENTRE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant was pregnant by six weeks and went for a medical check up with the second opposite party on 20.4.1998. She requested the second opposite party to terminate the pregnancy and perform family planning operation. The second opposite party directed the complainant to admit herself at the Health Centre of the first opposite party for doing termination of pregnancy. On 22.4.1998 the operation for medical termination was carried out and the complainant was discharged on 28.4.1998. She was asked to come back after 15 days for review. As there was abscess in her abdomen, she requested the opposite party to treat her for the same. The second opposite party refused to give treatment and also refused to come to the first opposite party's clinic for giving her treatment. Hence, the complainant went to Dr. Nehru Selvakumar for consultation. She was advised to have a scan and a scan was taken at Kancheepuram and it was found that there was a baby in the womb of the complainant. She was admitted on 29.6.1998 at the Chengalpattu Medical College Hospital and on 2.7.1998 surgery was done for termination of pregnancy and family planning. Thus, it is clear that the second opposite party has not carried out operation properly. From 22.4.1998 to 2.7.1998, the complainant suffered much hardship and her health deteriorated. She suffered from mental agony and sustained monetary loss. The complainant estimates the damages at Rs.5,00,000/-. There being negligence on the part of the second opposite party, both the opposite parties are liable. Hence, the complaint.

(2.) The first opposite party submitted that it is a gross-roots women's organization founded in 1981 to bring about adult education. Members were educated about the issues concerning family health and planning. The activities of the first opposite party covered about 57 hamlets. The members are drawn from the agricultural labourers. It is an organization intended for community based action for health promotion through a community health worker, through publication and distribution of popular education material on health and enpowerment programmes for adolescents. It is not profit making body. It is a social organization. The complainant was admitted at the request of the second opposite party. The averments made in the complaint are denied. The complainant never came for any check up to the first opposite party and did not come for any subsequently to the first opposite party. The complaint has been filed only to damage the reputation of the first opposite party. Only nominal charges were collected by the first opposite party and that too for using of the facilities in the hospital. The first opposite party, therefore, submits that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

(3.) The second opposite party has filed a version alleging as follows. The second opposite party is working as a consultant in the first opposite party organization. He is doing honorary service. On 22.4.1998 the second opposite party has operated upon the complainant after doing abortion and sterilization. The opposite party has not charged any amount. The complainant was discharged without any complaint. The complainant was advised to have a regular follow up. The complainant approached this opposite party's personal clinic and she was advised to have follow up with the 1st opposite party and she never did the same. The complications had happened to the complainant due to her own negligence in not following the advice of this opposite party and in not attending the regular check up with the first opposite party. Hence, this opposite party was not in a position to give proper medical care. If she had come regularly for post-medical check up, the unnecessary complications would not have happened. Hence there was only negligence on the part of the complainant. The allegation that the complainant spent huge sums towards medical expenses is false and imaginary. The alleged mental agony is also fanciful. The complaint is laid to cause damages to the opposite parties.