P.R. NIVEDITHA Vs. Y. RAMALAKSHMAMMA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant, Mr. Y.Ramudu 50yrs (herein referred as "Patient") approached petitioner/OP 1, Dr. P. Nivedita, on 15.11.2006 with the complaints of irritation in his left eye. On 16.11.2006, his cataract surgery was performed by Dr. P. Nivedita and Dr. K. Bharani Kumar Reddy (OPs 2 and 3) and the patient was discharged. Thereafter, the patient consulted OP 1/petitioner, on 13.12.2006 for feeling of irritation in the operated eye. Even after discharge from the hospital, the pain and swelling in his left eye, continued. The patient again visited OP/Hospital on 26.12.2006; the OP referred him to Sarojini Devi Hospital, Hyderabad, wherein it was diagnosed as extensive damage to his operated eye. Hence, on 3.1.2007, his left eye was removed. Hence, alleging medical negligence, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum and prayed for compensation of Rs.2 lakhs.

(2.) The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the OPs 1 to 4 to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as costs. The OPs preferred first appeal, which was dismissed by the State Commission. Hence, this revision petition is filed by OP-1.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner/OP-1 argued that OP-1 had no role in the operation as she did not operate the patient. The operation was conducted by OPs 2 & 3. OPs 2 and 3 are working in the Government Hospital; therefore, they were not made liable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. In the instant case, the patient developed endophthalmitis, it was not due to negligence of OPs. She further submitted that the patient had not taken rest. He attended to his work, Corneal ulcer developed due to eye injury while he was working in his fields. The counsel referred to few medical text books.