JASMINE PATEL Vs. R J MANEK SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DR . (Miss) Jasmine Patel of Bombay is the appellant and Dr. R.J. Manek Shah and Dr. Bacha's Memorial Bellvue Nursing Home are the respondents in the appeal against the order of Maharashtra State Commission in complaint No. 685/92.

(2.) THE complainant appellant alleged medical negligence on the part of the opposite party No. 1, Dr. R.J. Manek Shah who performed on her an operation known as lipolysis to remove the excess fat from her waist-downwards. She was hospitalised in the nursing-home of the opposite party between the period 16.10.1989 and 9.11.1989 for period of 23 days. Miss Patel who had lost her kidney while in Germany started putting on a lot of weight and was feeling uncomfortable about it. She happened to meet Mr. Manek Shah in Bombay who cautioned her that excess fat could lead to bad hernia and that this fact could be removed by a new technique Key-hole surgery which the respondent No. 1 had mastered. Persuaded by this advice, she underwent surgery on 16.10.1989. However, thereafter, she developed a number of complications affecting her bowels which were noticed only after a few days of the operation. She consulted Dr. Pratap Shroff when her condition became critical and had to undergo a second surgery on 21.10.1989 by Dr. Pratap Shroff. It is her case that Dr. Pratap Shroff told her and Dr. Manek Shah that the latter had committed blunders which may cause complainant's death. In any case, it was discovered that while removing the fat the suction instrument was carelessly used resulting in perforative peritonitis. Alleging gross negligence and carelessness on the part of Dr. Manek Shah, the respondent No. l, she claimed a compensation of Rs. 5,40,000/-, refund of the operational charges of Rs. 1,50,000/ - and Rs. 3,00,000/- towards compensation for physical pain and mental agony, thus, making a total of Rs. 9,90,000/-. Her complaint was heard by the Maharashtra State Commission where the respondent Dr. Manek Shah filed his version and stated that the alleged grievance of Miss Patel has been removed amicably through the intervention of a common friend and that she has been paid Rs. 25,000/- as ex-gratia on humanitarian grounds and that she had signed a statement dated 15th March, 1990 wherein she has dearly stated that she has no claim against the respondent No. 1. It was argued that in view of this declaration signed on March 15,1990 after receiving a payment of Rs. 25,000/- the complainant has no right to agitate the same claim again.

(3.) EY do not believe that it could have caused perforative peritonitis and even resulted in quadruple hernia. Taking note of the declaration signed by her on 15th March, 1990 regarding settlement of her claim by accepting Rs. 25,000/- though under protest, the State Commission found no merit in her claim and dismissed the same.