HANDA NURSING HOME Vs. A K HANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against order dated 06-08-2012 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission') in First Appeal No. FA-1002/08 - M/s Handa Nursing Home & Anr. Vs. Mrs. Ram Kali through LRs, by which while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 13.3.2006, the complainant- Ramkali felt some pain in the right side of her abdomen and was taken to Dr. Madan Jain who referred her to Dr. Saroj Singla for ultrasound. The ultrasound report was shown to Dr. Madan Jain and Dr. Jain referred the case to Handa Nursing Home, OP/petitioner. On seeing the ultrasound report, Dr. A.K. Handa diagnosed it as right ureterie stone and therefore, advised operation through Laser Technology. Consequently on 14.3.2006, she was operated upon and was discharged on 15.3.2006 from the Nursing Home, though complainant was suffering from pain but Dr. Handa informed the family members of the complainant - Ramkali that the operation had been successful, and the stone had been broken and DJ Stent had been inserted which was to be removed after one week and the complainant could be taken to home. Complainant - Ramkali paid Rs. 14,000/- to Handa Nursing Home. After one week i.e. 24.3.2006, the Stent was removed yet the complainant/Ramkali kept complaining pain and temperature. She was readmitted to Nursing Home i.e. OP/petitioner on 2.4.2006. On the advice of Dr. Handa, once again the stent was inserted in the right side of the abdomen and complainant - RamKali was discharged on 3.4.2006. The stent was removed after 10 days and on 19.4.2006, medicines were changed but despite this, the condition of the complainant/Ramkali did not improve and the pain & temperature continued. On 22.4.2006, IVP was conducted by Dr. Handa. The complainant/Ramkali was once again admitted to the Nursing Home. The condition of the complainant/Ramkali became worsened but nothing was done and it was admitted by Dr. Handa that there was some negligence on the part of the Nursing Home. When it was very strongly objected by the members of the family, Dr. A.K. Handa fled away from the Nursing Home. Faced with the situation, the complainant/Ramkali was taken to AIIMS where the Doctors orally called negligence of the Nursing Home as the operation of Dr. Handa was not conducted properly and there was lot of negligence and proper care was not taken by the Nursing Home. The condition of the complainant further deteriorated and was admitted to AIIMS on 27.4.2006 where she remained till 14.5.2006 during which period she was put to dialysis and hemo-dialysis couple of times. Since there was strike of doctors in Delhi, complainant/respondent was discharged from AIIMS though her condition was still critical as both her kidneys were not functioning and laboratory reports were not showing any signs of normalcy. The complainant/respondent was completely bedridden and unable to support herself on her own. Alleging deficiency on the part of opposite parties/petitioners, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. Opposite parties/ petitioners resisted complaint and denied the allegations and submitted that the treatment given was nowhere stated to be wrong by the doctors of the AIIMS; therefore, there was no negligence in administrating the treatment to the complainant by the doctors. It was admitted that the complainant visited the OP- Nursing Home along with the report of the ultra sound of Dr. Saroj Singla on 13.3.2006. It was further admitted that the complainant was seen on 13.3.2006 by Dr. A.K. Handa of Handa Nursing Home and it was diagnosed as right uretery stone. The doctor never advised operation through Laser Technology, however, the complainant/petitioner was advised Ureteroscopy. No operation of the complainant/petitioner was ever conducted but ureteroscope was inserted through a urinary passage and a DJ Stent was placed and the complainant was discharged on 15.3.2006. It was further admitted that the complainant/respondent visited the Nursing Home on 24.3.2006 and DJ Stent placed was removed as the complainant complained of pain and discomfort, which normally occurs in case where DJ Stent is placed. The complainant/petitioner was readmitted in the Nursing Home on 2.4.2006 with the complaint of pain. Though no stone was seen yet the DJ Stent was again placed because sometimes even a very small particle of few millimeters, if remain, could cause discomfort and pain. The complainant was discharged on 3.4.2006. Thereafter, the Stent was removed on 19.4.2006. As the pain persisted, the IVP was advised on 22.4.2006. Thereafter it was observed that blood urea and serum creatinine began to rise, the Nephrologist was consulted and the treatment started as per his advice. The complainant/petitioner left the Nursing Home on 25.4.2006. It is also denied that Dr. A.K. Handa left the Nursing Home and it was remained open. The condition of the complainant/petitioner did not deteriorate due to any fault in treatment conducted at Handa Nursing Home. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that there was any deficiency or negligence on the part of the doctors of the petitioner and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed opposite party to pay Rs.7 lakh as compensation including cost of litigation to the complainant. Appeal filed by opposite parties was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order, against which this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) None appeared of Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 even after service and they were proceeded ex-parte.