N T SUBRAHMANYAM Vs. B KRISHNA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Appellant Dr. N.T. Subrahmanyam and his wife Smt. Rajalakshimi were the complainants in O.P. No. 392/93 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tamil Nadu. The complaint appears to have been filed by the First Appellant Dr. N.T. Subrahmanyam but in the title of the order as well as in the order of the State Commission both the Appellants have been referred as complainants and it appears that Smt. Rajalakshimi might have been later on impleaded as co -complainant. The respondent Dr. B. Krishna Rao and Willingdon Nursing Home were the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in the complaint. It way be mentioned herein that Smt. Rajalakshimi complainant -appellant No. 2 has since died during the pendency of this appeal. A death certificate dated 18th February, 1995 has been filed but no application has been filed for bringing on record her legal representative perhaps on the ground that her husband is already on the record as appellant No. 1. The State Commission vide order dated 16th August, 1993 dismissed the complaint filed by the complainants. Against that Order the complainants have come before this Commission by way of this appeal.

(2.) THE case of the complainants is that in the first week of March, 1992 the complainants went to stay with their son at Madras. On 5th March, 1992, Smt Rajalakshimi, complainant vomited 800 cc of blood due to bleeding from esophageal varices. The complainants hired the services of the respondents to provide her the medical treatment. She was admitted in the second opposite partys Nursing Home at Madras to be attended and treated by the first opposite party Dr. B.K. Rao. One of the consideration for preferring services of the opposite parties is said to be because on previous occasions their services were hired on the advice of Dr. E. Peda Veera Raju, M.D., D.M. Gastroenterologist of Visakhapatnam for performing of repeated endoscopic sclerotherapy for the patient with a view to obliterate the varices as Dr. Rao was a senior endoscopist. The case of the complainants is that from the moment Smt. Rajalakshimi was admitted in the said Nursing Home there was total mismanagement to the extent of virtually throwing her into the jaws of death solely because of the negligence and improper rather wrong treatment given to her by the first opposite party Dr. Rao. The complainants submitted that the slipshod, callous and negligent way in which Smt. Rajalakshimi was treated can be narrated under the following counts :

(3.) THE complainant Dr. N.T. Subrahmanyam appeared in the witness box. Dr. Rajagopalan could not be examined by the complainants as unfortunately he has since died. Opposite Party No. 1 Dr. Rao also appeared in the witness box.