SHIV KUMAR BHUWALKA Vs. BELLE VUE CLINIC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 16.09.2000 at 03.00 pm, Mr. Shiv Kumar Bhuwalka, the Complainant No.1, met with a road accident. On the advice of his family physician, he got admitted to Belle Vue Clinic (OP) at about 05.40 p.m. Dr. Shaikh Hassan Iqbal, Orthopedic Surgeon (in short, 'Dr. Iqbal') was his treating doctor, he advised for X-ray, CT Scan and Blood Test, specific medicines and for proposed operation kept the patient nil by mouth. Thereafter the operation was delayed due to negligence of hospital staff. The Complainant further alleged that Dr. Iqbal, who operated him apprehended and confessed to him that a permanent damage to his nerve or to the hip might occur due to delayed operation. It was due to improper management of medical services from Belle Vue Clinic which is to be held responsible. During the course of hospitalization, there was superficial infection in the operative wound of patient, an extensive 2nd surgery for 2 1/2 hours was performed. Therefore, the patient had prolonged stay in the Belle Vue Clinic. Thus, it indicates deficiency along with negligence in the service of the management of OP and lack of responsiveness towards its patients. He was discharged on 12.10.2000, without complete cure, i.e. he was unable to move or walk an inch of distance. Thus, he had lost all his physical strength to stand upon his feet. The Complainant-1 was holding the post of Director in several profit oriented businesses and regularly earning about Rs.38,000/- per month. Due to negligence of OP he suffered physical loss/ disability and financial hardship. The complainant further alleged that the publicly declared objectives and advertisements of Belle Vue Clinic are misleading. Complainant No.-1 had a bitter experience and painful feeling of facing negligence, inaction, latches and deficiency in service of the management of Belle Vue Clinic. Copy of objectives of the Belle Vue Clinic has been annexed as Annexure 'B'. In addition to this, the Complainant alleged that on 22nd September, 2000 at about 08.00 a.m. when the patient tried to lift his body with the help and/or support of the over-head-rod, the said support and/or the over-head-rod, suddenly broke from its base, resulting in severe unbearable pain and injury to him. His wife, who was standing very close to the bed, was also injured due to the incident on her right eyebrow. Thus, it was the known maintenance of essential equipment and gadgets. On enquiry, the Manager Administration, (OP-4) avoided to reply the specific allegations about the breaking of rod. OP-4 was rude in his behavior with the family member of the patient. Moreover, he was reluctant to respond to the queries of the patient or his father Mr. Shyam Sundar Bhuwalka. Further, the Belle Vue Clinic is the most expensive Nursing Home of the city devoid of proper facilities. Hence, on the basis of those allegation the complainants filed a complaint against the OPs for seeking a total compensation of Rs.2,51,00,000/- under different heads as mentioned in the prayer clause.

(2.) The Manager (Administration) Mr. T.N.Bhattacharjee, filed the written version. It is submitted that OP provides facility to the doctor for their patient's hospitalization, surgery and nursing care. There is neither fixed panel of doctors nor OP recommends any doctor. The doctors who admit their patients are being fully aware of the facilities available with OP. The operation was performed by Dr. Iqbal , it was patient's own choice. Dr.Iqbal had recommended the admission of the Complainant No. 1. The sequence of events, evident from the medical records of the Complainant No.-1 [Exhibit RW-1/1] show that there was no delay in performing the operation. There was delay due to necessary investigations that had been prescribed by the attending surgeon and the neurologist before operation. The said tests were carried out by the Respondent's staff to the best of their capacity, considering the staff timings and the equipment available. The operation was successfully carried out. The OPs denied any negligence during treatment or during hospitalization. OPs further submitted that they have not advertised or represented that they have 24 hour emergency services.

(3.) Heard both the Counsel for the parties. The learned Counsel for the Complainant vehemently argued that due to gross negligence of OP, there was delay in conducting the operation. He relied upon the letter issued by Dr. Iqbal to the Medical Superintendent. The counsel submitted that, the patient was taken to the Operation Theatre at about 09.00 p.m. where the attending Surgeon Dr. Iqbal denied and/or refused to operate the patient, he became angry for non-compliance of his early instructions and advice due to the negligence, and irresponsiveness of the management of the said clinic. Dr. Iqbal, immediately, at 09.30 p.m. informed the Medical Superintendent, in writing, that the patient was sent to the Operation Theatre without a) Antiseptic Dressing & b) X-ray plates of spine. Dr. Iqbal then requested the Medical Superintendent to look into the matter at the earliest to regularize the above irregularities with the least possible delay. Thus, it was the callousness, negligence and latches on the part of the management of the said Clinic. The OP clinic was deficient in providing proper medical care to the patients, the staff was not co-operative, and the equipment / hospital beds were ill maintained. Hence, the patient suffered superficial infection of surgical wound, which subsequently prolonged his stay in the hospital, incurred huge expenses.