RAJASHREE MAHADEV KORE Vs. M M REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant has filed this complaint claiming damages of Rs.15.00 lakhs with interest and cost alleging negligence against the opposite party (for short, the "o. P. " ).

(2.) The case of the complainant is as follows : the complainant due to previous acquaintance with the O. P. , approached the O. P. to perform "tubectomy Operation". The complainant disclosed the O. P. that she was suffering from incurable disease of "hemophillia" since long. Accordingly, the O. P. performed the operation of tubectomy on 18.4.1997. The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.5,000 towards the operation fee and expenses incurred while she was indoor patient in the Nursing Home belonging to the O. P. The further case of the complainant is that the O. P. after the operation said that the operation was successful and in future she will not be having any conception.

(3.) The complainant having come to know during the month of November-December, 1998 that she had conceived rushed to the O. P. and enquired about the reasons for the pregnancy. The further case of the complainant is that the O. P. admitting the fault and negligence advised her to continue with the pregnancy by disclosing that there are lot of medicines available for curing the said disease of Hemophilia in the advanced technology of medical jurisprudence. Accepting the said suggestion, the complainant continued with the pregnancy and subsequently delivered a child on 18.9.1999 in Om Clinic, Akkalkot. The child was subsequently named as "gowrishankar". Thereafter, the complainant underwent another operation for Tubectomy in the Nursing Home called "nawal Prasuti and Shusrusha Gruha" at Sholapur on 23.3.1999. According to the complainant, the child born also suffers from the disease of Hemophilia. The complainant has no means of medical treatment for Hemophilia either at Akkalkot or at Sholapur and, therefore, she is required to spend considerable amount to go to Puna for the treatment. Therefore, the complainant has filed this complaint stating that due to the negligence of the O. P. in performing the tubectomy operation she was required to go for another operation and she is made to spend considerable amount for treatment of her third child for Hemophilia.