SHAILESH A SHAH Vs. NARMADABEN SHAMALBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dr. Shailesh A. Shah under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 challenged the legality, validity and correctness impugned order dated 29.03.2010 passed by the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad in Complaint No. 25 of 2001.

(2.) The brief facts of this case are the petitioner/OP/Dr. Shailesh A. Shah, performed prostatectomy operation of Mr. Shamalbhai Kalidas Patel, (since deceased-hereinafter referred as 'the patient') in 1993. He was trouble free after surgery for seven years, then again on 21.7.2000 approached the OP for the complaints of obstruction of urinary flow. The OP examined him and suspected cancerous tumour of prostate .OP tried to insert a tube in the urinary track (Catheter) but there was obstruction, hence tube was inserted through a hole made in abdominal wall. Thereafter, on 21.7.2000 OP performed Trans-Urethral Resection of the Prostate ( TURP) surgery and removed the tumor. It was performed without doing any biopsy but, OP told about immediate removal of tumor was essential to facilitate urinary flow. The specimen was sent for histopathology (HPE) at Maharishi House, Histopathology and Cytology Centre (Maharshi lab). The sons of complainant had some doubts, therefore they took one part of sample to Dr. Bhartiben, the Histo and Cytopathologist. The Maharishi Lab reported it as an advance stage of cancer whereas Dr. Bhartiben reported it as No cancer i.e. benign tumour. Blood P.S.A. test level revealed 20 units. The complainant alleged that, OP performed another operation and resected testes (orchiectomy).

(3.) Alleging medical negligence and wrong treatment given by OP, the complainant filed a complaint before the State Commission, Gujarat. The State Commission partly allowed the complaint and awarded a sum of Rs.2 lakh as a compensation plus Rs. 50,000/- towards mental agony, Rs. 1 lakh towards treatment and Rs.10,000/- as costs.