CHITRANGINI RAMCHANDRA MUJMULE Vs. MANOJ JAIN AND ORS.

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 5.11.2007 in Appeal No. 863/2007 and 965/2007 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short, 'State Commission'). The State Commission allowed both the Appeals filed against the order in Complaint No Consumer Complaint 238 of 2006 dated 22.5.2007 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (in short, 'District Forum'). The Complainant, Chitangini Ramchandra Mujmule (in short, 'the patient') on 25.11.2005, underwent Laparoscopic Sterilisation Operation (tubectomy) at Shri Sai Hospital, Madha owned by Dr. Abhay Lunawat and Dr. Sapna Lunawat (OPs -2 and 3). It was performed by Dr. Manoj Jain, the OP -1 who was a visiting surgeon coming from Solapur. About 6 months later the patient became pregnant; she visited the OP -3 Dr. Sapna on 2.5.2006 who confirmed it by doing Urinary Pregnancy Test (UPT). The OP -3 told the Complainant that because of two previous Caesar deliveries there was a danger to her health, therefore, OP -3 performed (MTP) abortion. As a mandatory the O.P. did not inform the Civil Surgeon about MTP. On the same day at 3.35 p.m. the OP -1 was called from Solapur, who again performed tubectomy by open method, and stitches were put. Patient was kept under observation of OPs -2 and 3 for two days. On 4.5.2006 evening, some complications cropped up in the patient like vomiting, pain in abdomen. Therefore, the patient was shifted to Solapur in Jain Hospital of OP -1, wherein OP -1 performed one corrective surgery, but the patient's condition did not improve, the patient further deteriorated and on 5.5.2006 shifted to another tertiary hospital named Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Research Centre, Solapur (In short Ashwini Hospital). The patient was treated in Ashwini Hospital by Dr. Nitin Toshniwal, performed Exploratory Laparotomy and after improvement discharged on 20.6.2006, which incurred heavy expenses Hence, the patient alleged that there was a medical negligence done by all the OPs and also the OPs -2 and 3 being holders of BAMS degree in Ayurveda, they are not qualified/allowed to do allopathic practice. Hence, filed a complaint before the District Forum at Solapur.

(2.) THE District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the OPs -1 to 3 to pay Rs. 1,10,000 to the Complainant and Rs. 20,156 towards medicines, Rs. 25,000 for physical pain and Rs. 5,000 for mental agony and Rs. 1,000 for cost of litigation. The OPs challenged the order of the District Forum by filing Appeals before the State Commission. Dr. Manoj Jain filed an Appeal No. 863 of 2007 and OPs -2 and 3 filed an Appeal No. 965 of 2007. The State Commission allowed both the Appeals and dismissed the complaint.

(3.) WE have heard both the parties. The learned Counsel for the Complainant. Ms. A. Subhashini vehemently argued, that there was negligence in performing first tubectomy operation by the OP -1 which resulted into pregnancy. Subsequently, on 2.5.2006, the OPs -2 and 3 who are non -qualified for Allopathic practice performed the abortion/MTP (Medical Termination of Pregnancy). On the same day OP -1 was called by the OPs -2 and 3 for performing tubectomy again, as there was failure of sterilisation operation performed by OP -1 about six months back. The OP -1 visited the Sai Hospital, and at 3.30 p.m. performed an open tubectomy and put single stitch. Thereafter, on 4.5.2006, evening the patient developed some complications like pain in abdomen and vomiting, for which OP -1 advised to shift the patient to his hospital at Solapur.