HRIDAYLAL SAHU Vs. ROSHAN UPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellants filed the instant Appeal under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, (the Act'), against the Order dtd. 3/11/2027 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh. ("State Commission') in Consumer Complaint No. 25 of 2017, wherein the State Commission dismissed the Complaint of the Complainants (Appellants herein).

(2.) For convenience, the parties in the present matter are being referred to as per position held in Consumer Complaint.

(3.) Brief facts of the case, as per the Complainants, are that Mrs. Jai Shree Sahu, the deceased patient is wife of Complainant No. 1 consulted OP-1 at his Nursing Home and Maternity Centre with the complaint of stiffness and pain in her left breast. Her Thyroid tests for T3, T4, T5, and TSH were conducted and she was admitted on 10/12/2015. A tumor operation was performed on her left breast, during which the portion of the breast containing the tumor was removed. Thereafter, the tumour was sent for a biopsy test. However, OP-1 did not conduct a biopsy test before the operation. Instead of improving, the deceased's condition worsened after the surgery, with increased pain in her breast and waist, and her overall condition deteriorated. When her relatives inquired about her prognosis, OP-1 stated that he had performed a major operation, which was actually a minor procedure involving eight stitches. On 18/12/2015 she was taken to Upadhyay Nursing Home for a check-up. OP-1 mentioned that he had removed half of the breast tumour and that complete removal would cure her. On 30/12/2015, the deceased experienced increased waist pain. OP-1 attributed this to dietary causes and prescribed medication and injections. He also referred her to Dr. Iqbal Pervej, an orthopaedic, who reviewed her sonography and X-ray reports and prescribed medication. Despite this, the deceased found no relief. On 31/12/2015, the biopsy report confirmed that she had cancer. OP-1 advised Complainant No. 1 not to inform the deceased about the cancer immediately and suggested another operation to remove the tumour. By 7/1/2016, her pain had intensified, affecting her ability to stand and sit, with no relief from OP-1's treatment. On 25/1/2016, the deceased was admitted to the hospital, where further pathology tests were conducted, and medications were administered, but there was no improvement. OP-1 then performed multiple tests, including abdominal sonography and X-rays, and on 2/2/2016 she was referred to Sanjeevani Hospital, Raipur to Dr. Yusuf Memon. She and Complainant No. 1 visited Dr. Yusuf Memon on 5/2/2016 and he conducted various tests, including echocardiography, serology, biochemistry, haematology, and thyroid panel tests. A sample for BFC test was sent to Mumbai. The deceased also underwent an MRI at Ramkrishna Care and was admitted to Sanjeevani. On 8/2/2016, the Mumbai test result was received. From 11/2/2016 to 23/2/2016, she underwent radiation therapy and was discharged the same day. The doctors recommended chemotherapy over surgery, as the initial operation without a biopsy had aggravated her condition. To save her life, she sought treatment from Dr. Suresh H. Advani at SL Raheja Hospital, Mumbai on 1/3/2016. She was admitted to Care Angel Hospital and underwent continuous chemotherapy. She required frequent travel to Raipur and Mumbai for chemotherapy sessions, causing significant physical and financial strain. Despite these efforts, the initial negligence in the surgery by OP-1 caused substantial physical and mental suffering. The Complainant No. 1 had spent Rs.50,00,000.00 on treatment. She continued to endure financial hardship, mental anguish, and physical suffering. If OP-1 had initially conducted a biopsy, she would not have faced such severe issues. OP-1, not being a cancer specialist, should have referred her to a higher cancer hospital after conducting biopsy. This failure constitutes medical negligence. The Complainants filed a Consumer Complaint and sought compensation of Rs.75,10,000.00 for medical expenses, mental agony, financial losses, and litigation costs.