J JANAKI Vs. YASHODA SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL & ORS ; V NARESH (SURGEON); D R K PRASAD (SURGEON); NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ; INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals as detailed in the heading above, have been filed against the impugned order, passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad, (hereinafter referred as 'State Commission') dated 25.9.2008 in consumer complaint no. CD-09/2003, Smt. J. Janaki vs. Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital and others, vide which, while partly allowing the complaint, the opposite parties (OPs no.1 to 3) were directed to pay a sum of Rs.3 lakhs to the complainant alongwith Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation. The case against the OPs no.4 to 6 was ordered to be dismissed. FA No.152/2009 has been filed by OP-1, M/s. Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital and OP-3, Dr. V. Naresh, whereas FA No.289/2009 has been filed by OP-2, Dr. D.R.K. Prasad, pleading for dismissal of the said complaint. FA No.356/2009 has been filed by the complainant, J. Janaki, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded to Rs.15,50,702/-, alongwith interest.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant, J. Janaki had pain in her stomach on 1.10.2001, whereupon she went to Premier Hospital, Hyderabad for treatment, where Dr. Mahesh Marda detected that she had stones in the gallbladder, which were required to be removed by surgery. He prescribed some medicines to the complainant for temporary relief. The complainant again felt pain on 16.8.2002, when she went to the same doctor, who suggested her to go for surgery for removal of stones in her gallbladder. She went to OP-1, Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital on 2.9.2002 to get operated for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. The OP-2, Dr. D.R.K. Prasad advised her that surgery was to be performed immediately and for that purpose, he arranged the services of OP-3, Dr. V. Naresh, who conducted the operation on 4.9.2002. It has been stated that Dr. V. Naresh removed the gallbladder itself, without informing her about the removal of gallbladder. After the operation, when she was brought back to her room in the OP-1 Hospital, she felt increasing pain in her stomach, which started bulging. It has been alleged that there was no post -operative care by the OPs, rather they discharged her from the hospital on 7.9.2002, although she was having persistent pain. The operating surgeon, Dr. V. Narersh never came to attend to her. The OP-2 Dr. D.R.K. Prasad asked her to go to Malakapet Branch of the OP-1 Hospital to meet Dr. V.Naresh. She and her husband went to that hospital on 11.9.2002, but the said doctor told them that everything was alright. The complainant says that one of their family friends brought her to another doctor Mr. Ashok Rao, who advised her to get admitted in Global Hospital, where she went on 12.9.2002. After performing certain tests, she was told by the doctors at Global Hospital that during the previous operation, staple was fixed to the bile duct, which connects the liver to stomach instead to gallbladder duct and due to wrong fixing of the staple, the duct of liver got damaged and bile juice started oozing into the stomach and caused infection. The doctor advised that Biliary Peritonitis post cholecystectomy bile duct injury operation was to be performed to correct the same, and that, it was known as Hepatico Jejunostomy. The said operation was performed on 14.9.2002 and she had to be shifted to the ICU, where costly medicines were administered. The complainant was informed by various doctors, that there was negligence and callousness on the part of Dr. D.R.K. Prasad and Dr. Naresh in wrongly fixing of staple at the time of operation. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking damages amounting to Rs.15,50,702/- on account of alleged medical negligence on the part of OPs. It was also stated that because of her medical condition, the complainant was not able to attend some interview in the Bank, by which, she could have been promoted in her service. It is also stated that looking at her condition, her mother got a heart attack and had to be admitted in Medwin Hospital.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the OPs by filing a written statement before the State Commission, in which they denied the allegations against them and stated that they had explained to the complainant that she was suffering from acute cholesystitis and required removal of gallbladder with the stones, as she had the tendency of getting repeated infections. She and her husband signed the consent form for surgery, for which she was admitted in the hospital on 2.9.2002 and the date of operation was fixed on 4.9.2002. It is also stated that it was explained to the complainant and her attendants that Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy connotes the removal of gallbladder with stones and there could be post operational complications. According to OP-1 to 3, her condition after the operation was stable, and there was no complaint of stomach bulging. Dr. D.R.K. Prasad was making her check-up at regular intervals and she was attended by OP-3 Dr. Naresh also on 6.9.2002 and advised discharge on 6.9.2002 itself. On the request of the attendants of the complainant, she was kept in the hospital for one more day and discharged on 7.9.2002, when her condition was stable and comfortable and there was no complaint of pain in the stomach or any discomfort. The complainant came to the OP-1 hospital on 11.9.2002 for removal of sutures and at that time also, her condition was found to be stable. She went to Yashoda Hospital, Malakpet also to meet OP-3, where she was examined with full attention and it was found that there was no abnormal findings of the abdomen. However, OP-3, observing yellowish discoloration of eyes and suspecting jaundice, advised the complainant to undergo LFT and UGI Endoscopy tests. Despite that advice, the complainant was reluctant to get the tests done. OP-1 to 3 stated that they were unaware of the subsequent events that had taken place at the Global Hospital and that, there was no negligence etc. on their part. The OP also stated that the hospital as well as the doctors were insured with the New India Assurance Company Ltd. and the said Company should also have been impleaded as party in the case.