RAJMAL SINGH Vs. MADHU GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Surgeons/Gynaecologists take utmost interest and care of the patients suffering from abdominal and pelvic diseases. They are aware of the different varieties of atypical hernias and know that unusual symptoms may denote an early phase of herniosis. Otherwise, the old maxim regarding incomplete knowledge will become operative .

(2.) The Complaint was filed in the year 2002, by Rajmal Singh, Complainant-1 and his 5 minor sons, as Complainant Nos.- 2 to 6. It was alleged that due to negligence of the Dr. Madhu, OP-1, of Navjeevan Hospital, OP-2 and Dr. Atul Aggarwal, OP-3, of Shivam Hospital, OP-4, Smt. Krishna Singh, wife of Complainant-1 died. The complainant-1 died during the pendency of this case, hence, the LR's are brought on record.

(3.) Mrs. Krishna Singh, (herein referred to as, "Patient") was suffering from abdominal pain, she was told by some doctors about the removal of uterus. Hence, in May 1999, she visited Dr. Madhu Gupta (the OP-1) who advised her 'not to worry and that there was no need, for the present, for removal of uterus (Hysterectomy) and advised medication. Thereafter, again on 14.08.1999 she, with her son visited OP-1 at Navjeevan Hospital (OP2) due to severe stomach pain. After performing ultrasound of lower abdominal at Shivam Nursing Home OP-1, reported as "possibility of Twisted Ovarian mass cannot be entirely ruled out sonographically and needs to be investigated further (Annexure -3). The OP-1 admitted her for observations, administered painkillers, IV fluids and discharged her on the same evening. Severe pain again started at 1.00 AM of 15.08.1999, the patient was again admitted to OP-2 at 6 am. The OP-1, on examination insisted to perform urgent surgery, but the Complainant no.1 did not consent to the same. He left his wife in the care of OP-1, along with his minor son, and went to Meerut to bring his mother-in-law, but on his return in the evening, he was surprised to know that OP-1 had operated his wife at 2 PM, who, landed her in an extremely serious condition. The OP-1, in collusion with OP-3, performed operation, without anybody's consent, it was performed in the Labour Room at OP-2, without having any proper facilities, hence, developed septicemia and became more critical. Hence, on the same evening, at 11 p.m., the patient was shifted to ICU at Shivam Hospital, the OP-4. The discharge slip of OP-2 is Annexure-5. She was in ICU, kept on ventilator in OP-4, from 16.8.1999 to 10.09.1999. As, there was no improvement at OP- 4, the complainant no.1, shifted his wife to Batra Hospital, New Delhi on 10.9.1999. Unfortunately, after 10 days, on 20.9.1999, she expired due to septicemia. The death summary dated 20.9.1999 (Annexure -6) confirmed that there was overwhelming sepsis with MODS. The Complainant No. 1, sought entire medical records from OP- 1, through his letter dated 14.02.2000 (Annexure 7), but there was no response. Complainant alleged negligence on the OP-1 to OP-4, that the death of his wife was due to the surgery which was done unnecessarily, the diagnosis was wrong; operation was performed in labour room, without any consent. There was imperfection, shortcoming and inadequacy in nature and performance of operation and also in post-operative care. Complainant filed a complaint before this commission against the OPs and prayed to fix the contractual and tortuous liability, jointly and severally. Complainant prayed for compensation of Rs.24,79,453/- as detailed in Annexure 8, along with interest @ 24% per annum, from the date of filing of this complaint. Also, prayed for interim directions to produce medical records and to appoint a local commissioner to examine labour room of OP-2.