INCHARGE, SAI HOSPITAL & ANR Vs. GODAWARI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by Sai Hospital, UTAI in URAI Tehsil of Chhattisgarh and Dr. R. Bhattacharya, the opposite parties before the District Consumer Forum Durg, Chhattisgarh (for short 'the District Forum') challenging the order dated 28.1.2008 passed by Chhattisgarh State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Raipur (for short 'the State Commission') vide which the State Commission has affirmed the District Forum's order allowing the complaint of the respondent.

(2.) HUSBAND of the complainant Ramesh Dewangan was admitted for treatment of Hernia in the hospital of petitioner No. 1 and was operated by petitioner No. 2 on 21.1.2004. The patient was hospitalized until 2.2.2004. While the complainant alleged that the patient was forcefully discharged from the hospital on the ground that he cannot afford the expenses of the private hospital, the Hospital claimed that he was discharged on his own request. Since the condition of the patient continued to deteriorate after his discharge from the hospital and petitioner No. 2, Dr. R. Bhattacharya refused to further attend to him on the ground that he stood discharged from the hospital, he was taken to Jawahar Lal Nehru Hospital and Research Centre, Bhilai on 14.2.2004 where he was admitted as patient of "post -operative case of right inguinal obstructed hernia with small bowel fistula, sepsis, acute renal failure, dehydration and malnutrition." The general condition being poor, he was put on conservative management and discharged on 20.3.2004 when he had gained substantial improvement with advice to dress the wound every day and take high protein diet and multi -vitamin. However, the patient again reported in a very bad condition on 14.4.2004, but despite best attention subsequently expired at 7.30 a.m. on the next day i.e. on 15.4.2004.

(3.) ALLEGING medical negligence on part of the first hospital i.e. petitioner No. 1 and its Doctor - petitioner No. 2, the complainant who is the widow of the deceased patient filed a complaint before the District Forum and sought a compensation of Rs. 2,05,000. The District Forum after consideration of the evidence produced by both the sides arrived at the conclusion that "post -operative precautions were ignored by the opposite parties and proper advice was not given to Ramesh Dewangan which is why his condition deteriorated and ultimately he expired." For this deficiency on part of the opposite parties, the District Forum has awarded an amount of Rs. 1,50,000 to be paid within a period of one month and Rs. 1000 as cost of litigation. Aggrieved against this order of the District Forum, the petitioners had filed an appeal before the State Commission who while dismissing their appeal, further imposed Rs. 1000 as cost of the appeal to be paid to the complainant.