ASHOK KUMAR RAI Vs. SEEMA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is directed against the majority order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow, U.P. (for short "State Commission") in Complaint Case No. 20 of 2004. By the impugned order, the State Commission held that there was negligence on the part of the Appellant in treating the Complainant and directed the doctor to pay ?1,50,000/ - to the Complainant from the date of the receipt of the order failing which it would attract an interest of 12% per annum.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the material facts are that the Complainant, a pregnant lady, approached the Appellant Doctor on 13.2.2004 with abdominal pain and on examination, he detected excess collection of fluid in the abdomen. She was treated as an inpatient from 13.2.2004 till 17.2.2004. The Complainant pleaded that in order to avoid extra expenses, she had taken a room on rent, neighbouring the hospital and was staying with her in laws and undergoing treatment. On 2.3.2004, she was again admitted in the hospital for abdominal pain and the Doctor prescribed some medicines and informed her that the expected date of delivery would be 15.3.2004. The Complainant averred that on 15.3.2004 and on 16.3.2004, the treating doctor pumped out fluid from the abdomen. Once again, on 17.3.2004, the Complainant suffered pain in her abdomen and was admitted in the O.P. clinic at 6.00 P.M. The nurse examined her and informed the attendants that there was no foetus movement of the child in the womb and that the child had already died.

(3.) THE Complainant pleaded that inspite of repeated requests from her family attendants, the Doctor had insisted on conducting an ultrasound scan and did not take any steps to perform the delivery by caesarean operation. The Complainant contended that the Doctor did not treat the patient till 6.00 P.M. the next day, though she had become bluish in palor. The dead child was also not removed from the womb. On 18.3.2004 at 5.15 P.M., a second opinion was taken from Dr. Anirudh Singh who had operated upon the patient and removed the dead child. It is the Complainant's case that on 17.3.2004, had the Doctor repeatedly monitored the foetus at regular intervals of 15 minutes and had he scanned the ultrasound also at regular intervals, the child could have been saved. It is the further case of the Complainant that Dr. Anirudh Singh and his co -doctors opined that had the operation been delayed beyond 6.30 P.M. on 18.3.2004, the Complainant would have died. The Complainant contended that her physical condition had weakened after discharge from the second hospital i.e. on 28.3.2004. It is her case that Dr. Anirudh Singh had opined that in her present condition she cannot conceive for the next two years. The Complainant further pleaded that the Appellant had demanded huge amounts of money from her but was negligent in treating her which led to the death of the unborn child.