VISHWANATH SHIVLING BIRAJDAR Vs. GANGADHAR SANGRAM MITKARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner preferred the present Revision Petition against the common impugned order dated 29.09.2011 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes redressal Commission, (in short, 'State Commission') Mumbai, Circuit Bench at Aurangabad in First Appeal Nos. 2567/2005, 2613/2005 and 101/2006 wherein the State Commission partly allowed the appeal filed by the Petitioner and directed him to pay Rs.50,000/- with 9% interest to the Complainant from 23.07.2004 till its realization.

(2.) Facts in brief : Ganesh, son of Complainants Sh. Gangadhar Mitkari and Smt. Kamblabai Mitkari who was suffering from piles was operated on 5/6/2003, by the petitioner/OP-1 Dr. Birajdar, at his Sanjivini Hospital, Udgir. It was alleged that OP-1, prescribed Injection Voveron for the pain, which was given by an untrained compounder. Thereafter, at 2.00 p.m. Ganesh complained about non-urination. At 6.00 p.m., as there was no movement of Ganesh, the OP-1 was called, but he did not attend. Again, at 11.00 p.m., Complainant called the OP-1 and his compounder but no avail. On 06.06.2003, early in the morning, at 6.00 am, the OP-1 referred the patient to Vivekanand Hospital (OP-2) at Latur. It was alleged that, prior to the operation, the pathological tests were not conducted by OP-1. I was also alleged that immediately after the operation, the patient complained of pain and suffered from convulsion and vomiting and non-urinal, but OP-1 did not examine the patient, did not take proper precautions and that there was a delay in referring the patient to OP-2. The OP-1 instead of referring the case to Nero surgeon, the operation was carried out by M.S. Surgeon at Vivekanand Hospital (OP-2). The Complainant contended that the deceased was a strong and healthy young boy, who has received a call for recruitment in police force. He was running a grocery shop and Complainants were dependent on him. Therefore, both OP-1, Dr. Birajdar and OP-2 Vivekanand Hospital are liable for medical negligence and deficiency in service.

(3.) Hence, a complaint was filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (in short, 'District Forum') and claimed compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- with 12% interest, from the date of complaint, and Rs.50,000/- for mental agony.