NAMITA CHATTERJEE Vs. MOUSAMI BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition has been filed before this Commission under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 31.05.2013 in Appeal No. 328 of 2012 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short, 'State Commission'). The State Commission was pleased to absolve the treating surgeon OP-1 of any liability while upholding the liability of the hospital for a sum of Rs.50,000/- as awarded by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (in short, 'District Forum').

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner/Complainant Smt. Namita Chatterjee who was suffering from several health problems including Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and was under the treatment of the OP-3, Dr. Tushar Maji. After taking fitness from OP-3, the complainant underwent the cataract surgery on the left eye on 14.06.2007 in the H. K. Nursing Home of OP-2; it was performed by the OP-1, Dr. Mousami Banerjee an Ophthalmic Surgeon and a Specialist in Micro surgery. She was discharged on the next day on 15.06.2007, but she was not free from eye discomforts, like irritation, watering and reddishness. She consulted the OP-1, who prescribed some medicines and assured her of early cure. But, the complainant did not get any relief, hence, she once again visited the OP-1 on 21.06.2007, who prescribed some high dose of antibiotics and other medicines and unnecessarily put a note in the prescription about referring the patient to a higher institute. The OP-1 did not even mention any history or any other details. On 23.06.2007, the OP-1 referred the case to a higher institute. Thereafter, the complainant visited Disha Eye Hospital, Hooghly, on 24.06.2007 and Dr. D. Chakroborty diagnosed her case as Endophthalmitis, hence, and he referred her to Dr. T. K. Sinha at Barrackpore Disha Centre. There, Dr. T. K. Sinha operated her left eye and continued treatment till 19.11.2007, which did not yield any result or any improvement, hence, the left eye was eviscerated. Thus, the Complainant's allegations were that, as per three-Member enquiry committee at CMOH, Burdwan, the OP-2/ H. K. Nursing Home was unhygienic and had inadequate infrastructure for conducting eye surgery which caused infection in the operated left eye of the complainant. Also, the OP-1 performed cataract surgery in a negligent manner, without taking proper precautions and pre-operative investigations. It was gross deficiency in service, hence, the complainant approached the District Forum for a relief of compensation to the tune of Rs.9,99,000/-.

(3.) The District Forum held the OP No.1 & 2 deficient in service and negligent in rendering medical services to the Complainant and granted compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of the Complainant, out of which the OP-1 was directed to pay Rs.4,50,000/- while the OP-2 was to pay Rs.50,000/-.