JAITA MITRA BASU Vs. DR. ANIRBAN CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Sec. 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") against the Opposite Parties seeking to direct the OPs:

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as per the Complainants, are that Complainant 2, a minor of 2 years of age, was experiencing swelling in the right gluteal region since 2000. Initially, the lump was small, barely visible, and painless. Over time, various doctors were consulted, and they opined that it was likely a case of neurofibroma, assuring there was no cause for concern. By 2011, the lump had begun to increase in size and occasionally became painful, prompting the parents seeking her further evaluation. They consulted Dr. G Venugopal, a Senior Consultant at Institute of Neurosciences, Kolkata who recommended an FNAC test. The FNAC test, conducted in September 2014, suggested a probable diagnosis of angiolipoma. Based on this, Dr. Venugopal advised consulting a surgeon. On 21/5/2015, Complainant 2's parents consulted Dr. Pradeep Sen, a surgeon, who advised an MRI of the right pelvis. The MRI conducted on 22/5/2015, indicated the need for further evaluation. Subsequently, they approached Dr. Anirban Chatterjee, a vascular surgeon, who reviewed the medical history and noted a progressively enlarging soft tissue lesion in the right buttock and upper thigh. He recommended further tests, including a CT angiography and certain blood tests. On 15/6/2015, CT angiography revealed Arterio-Venous Malformation (AVM) in the right buttock. After review of the reports Dr Chatterjee, recommended a surgical procedure known as vascular embolization. He estimated that the surgery would last about five hours and cost Rs.2,00,000.00. The procedure was scheduled on 16/9/2015, at Nightingale Hospital. After the surgery on 16/9/2015, Dr. Chatterjee informed the parents postsurgery that while the embolization was performed successfully, a small amount of glue had accidentally slipped into the main artery of the right leg. He assured them that the issue was minor and would not adversely affect the patient's health. He advised a minor follow-up procedure the next day to address the issue.

(3.) On 17/9/2015, the follow-up procedure was conducted, and Dr. Chatterjee claimed that 95% of the blood circulation was restored. However, on 18/9/2015, he informed the parents that circulation of blood to the right leg had stopped, and there were signs of gangrene. Dr. Chatterjee suggested transferring Complainant 2 to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Delhi for specialized treatment by Dr. VS Bedi. The complainants promptly arranged for her transfer to Delhi. Upon admission at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital on 19/9/2015, doctors found significant deterioration in her right lower limb, including black discoloration, swelling and loss of pulse. A CT angiography confirmed that the condition had worsened, necessitating the amputation of her right leg above the knee to prevent further complications. Following consultations, her right leg was disarticulated on 22/9/2015. She also developed pneumothorax, which required immediate treatment. Despite being discharged on 13/11/2015, she required repeated hospitalizations for wound healing and follow-ups, incurring significant medical expenses. To regain mobility, they purchased a prosthetic leg from Otto Bock Healthcare for Rs.7,25,000.00 as per experts advice. A disability certificate dtd. 25/11/2016 confirms that she sustained 90% permanent disability and severe emotional, financial and physical burden on Complainant No. 2 and her family, mandating lifelong care. It is the Complainants case that failure to explore alternative scope of treatments, such as bypass surgery, compounded the situation. The unnecessary procedure performed on 17/9/2015 allowed gangrene to develop, ultimately necessitating the amputation. Alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service, on part of the Opposite Parties (OPs), they prayed for compensation for the loss of career prospects, physical and mental agony, medical expenses, litigation costs etc.