LAWS(NCD)-2025-1-48

DASHRATH P. PRAJAPATI Vs. JIVABHAI VAGHABHAI BATTA

Decided On January 22, 2025
Dashrath P. Prajapati Appellant
V/S
Jivabhai Vaghabhai Batta Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present appeal under Sec. 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, a challenge is made by the appellant original Respondent to a decision dtd. 25/7/2018 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhavnagar in Consumer Complaint No. 214 of 2014.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the rise of present appeal are as the wife of the original Complainant and mother of two children suffered a paralytic stroke on 13/7/2014 and as such was immediately brought at about 7:40 am in morning for consultation and treatment on 14/7/2014, where she was admitted as an indoor patient and diagnosed as suffered from paralysis stroke. Upon condition being deteriorated the appellant has referred her to a Neuro-physician at Bhavnagar itself for further treatment after giving preliminary supportive treatment, the appellant has referred her to a Dr. Gurumukhani of Bhavnagar a Neuro-physician. Dr. Gurumukhani also treated her for a period of few days but, unfortunately said deceased Devuben Jivabhai succumbed to the said paralytic attack even after two days of intensive care by Dr. Gurumukhani and died on 16/7/2014 at about 10:45 hours. It has been stated that before and while referring deceased Devuben to a hospital of Dr. Gurumukhani certain medicines were called for, for giving preliminary treatment in addition to the other supportive treatment, two injections were called for one named as Monocef-SB and EDAVARON 1.5 MG/ML. The condition was such that under emergency situation the said deceased was required to be referred to Neuro-physician but then ultimately she could not survive and after almost a couple of days period the Complainant with his aid and assistance ransack and attacked the Complainant and compelled him to express regret by writing on letter pad on 25/7/2014 that said two injections were not applied since the said letter pad was compelled to be written by the appellant and hue and cry was made at the hospital and given a threat of dire consequences under that coercive situation the appellant was compelled to put it in writing with the reason on account of such act, even on that very day the appellant was required to apply for immediate police protection from the local police station by giving an application before the concerned police station of that area. Despite the fact that appellant bonafidely gave immediate treatment and having found that situation has worsened immediately referred to a Neuro-physician as mentioned above after giving details and briefing to the said doctor and for a period of 2 days the appellant had no occasion to treat and the deceased died not at his clinic but at a treating doctor's clinic after two days of rigorous treatment, but, somehow with a view to apply some coercion with a aim known to them the pressure tactics applied with the aid and assistance as indicated above and then by utilizing the same method a complaint came to be filed in the Ld District Forum, Bhavnagar which was then registered as Consumer Complaint No. 214 of 2014 for the reliefs which are set out in the complaint ultimately in substance for seeking compensation of Rs.15.00 Lacs for negligence and deficiency of service by the present appellant doctor. The said consumer complaint was served upon appellant the appellant appeared and projected his defense by submitting appropriate evidence but ultimately after adjudication the Ld. District Forum was pleased to pass an order on 25/7/2018 by directing the appellant to pay compensation of an amount of Rs.4,60,000.00 with interest @6% with effect from 10/11/2014 within a period of 30 days and it is this judgment and order is made the subject matter of appeal before this Commission.

(3.) The main matter i.e. present appeal was admitted long back and was awaiting for final hearing right from the year 2018, hence we requested the Ld. Advocates to proceed with the matter promptly, as a result of this the Ld. Advocate Mr. S. P. Hasurkar has represented appellant whereas Mr. D. V. Trivedi has represented the original Complainant with the legal heirs of deceased Devuben. Heard, Ld. Advocates.