DR. SHRIKANT V. MUKEWAR MIDAS HOSPITAL CENTRAL BAZAR ROAD, RAMDSPETH NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA Vs. VIMAL & 2 ORS. WD/O MADHAVRAO YEOLE, R/O C/O RATNAKAR YEOLE, PLOT NO. 20, ADHYAPAK LAYOUT NEW TRIMURTI NAGAR, NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - Brief facts relevant to dispose of this revision petition are that on 12-09-2002, Mr. Mahadeo Yeole, a 69 years old person (herein referred as patient) was suffering from abdominal pain. He consulted the local doctor, Dr. Sawarkar at Katol, as per his advise, the complainant, Smt.Vimal admitted her husband (patient) in the Midas Hospital at Nagpur which is run by Dr. Shrikant V. Mukewar (opposite party herein). The patient was known case of COPD i.e. chronic obstruction pulmonary disease, i.e. difficulty in breathing and there was obstruction to the air flow. The OP 1 administered injection Clavam at 8 P.M. On 13-09-02002 the OP 1 examined the patient at 10 A.M. and advised x-ray chest and some blood tests. In the evening Dr. Anand Prasad examined him and advised further line of treatment. The complainant alleged that the OP 1 was sitting in his chamber and was not paying any attention to the patient. Even the staff also neglected the patient. The patient was anemic. The patient's condition was deteriorating, the difficulty in breathing which became serious. The OP/Hospital did not have any emergency facilities. On 14-09-2002 the OP took a decision to perform gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the patient was shifted to ICU. The patient was treated in OP hospital till 19-09-2002 and thereafter the OP advised to shift the patient to other hospital for life supporting system as it was not available in his hospital. Therefore, the complainant shifted her husband to opposite party No.2 hospital i.e. Arif Nursing Home for critical care management. Therefore, overall, she incurred heavy treatment expenditure due to negligent attitude of OP 1 & 2. Therefore, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP1 and 2 the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Nagpur claiming compensation of Rs. 2,00,000.00.

(2.) The District forum dismissed the complaint. Thereafter, the complainant preferred first appeal before Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench, Nagpur. The State Commission allowed the appeal and directed the OP1 to pay Rs.72,371.00 towards hospital expenses and Rs.1,00,000.00 towards physical and mental agony along with cost of Rs.10,000.00. Therefore, aggrieved by the impugned order of the State Commission, the complainant filed this revision petition.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties, perused the medical record available on the file. The counsel for the complainant argued that the OP has not taken proper care during treatment of the patient. He neglected the patient and not treated as per standard norms. Therefore, in the instant case, the State Commission has awarded proper compensation.