DOMOH Vs. GORELAL AHIRWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE son of the complainant was suffering from abdominal pain and he was taken to City Mission Hospital, Damoh on 2.7.2002, where X -ray was taken, which revealed that there was stone in the bladder area. The patient was admitted and on 3.7.2002. Dr. Ashish Agrawal, OP No.2 performed operation for removal of stone from ureter. The patient remained admitted in the hospital up to 10.7.2002, but he was still feeling pain and as such, X -ray was done on 11.7.2002. The X -ray revealed that there was no stone in the bladder. However, the patient was still feeling pain and as such, the complainant took his son to Dr. Pathak in Pathak X -ray and Ultrasonography Centre on 12.7.2002, where X -ray was taken wherein it transpired that there was stone in the left renal pelvis. Dr. Pathak, therefore, advised operation. The complainant informed him that the operation had already been done for removal of stone, but he was told by Dr. Pathak that previous operation was not successful and the stone had not been removed therefore another operation for removal of stone is necessary. The son of the complainant was again operated and complaint was filed before District Forum seeking compensation of Rs.2,10,000. The complaint filed before the District Forum was dismissed vide order dated 29.11.2002. This order was challenged before the State Commission.

(2.) THE State Commission held OP Nos. 1 to 3 responsible for medical negligence and ordered payment of charges of operation to the tune of Rs.20,000 and compensation of Rs.30,000 for physical and mental torture to the minor child. The total sum of Rs.50,000 was ordered to be paid by all the opposite parties jointly and severally to the complainant. Cost of Rs.1,000 was also awarded in favour of the complainant. This order is subject matter of challenge in the revision before the Commission.

(3.) WE have heard counsel appearing on both sides. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before us that the X -ray report dated 2.7.2000 had indicated the presence of radio opaque shadow and presence of one elongated medium size stone in the bladder. Dr. Ashish Agrawal had operated on the son of the complainant for removal of the stone but the stone had already moved from the said position and could not be detected as a result of which, the stone could not be removed. However, since X -ray, which was taken on 11.7.2002, did not indicate the presence of any Radio opaque shadow in the bladder, the son of the complainant was discharged. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, no affidavit of Dr. Pathak has been filed so as to point out any negligence on the part of Dr. Ashish Agrawal. He produced literature showing that the stones can move and placed two judgments before us in support of his contentions that due care had been taken by Dr. Ashish Agrawal. The judgments relate to degree of care expected from doctor which is reasonable degree of skill, knowledge & care. The rulings are: Laxman Balkrishna Joshi v. Trimbak Bapu Godbole and Anr and Vinitha Ashok (Smt) v. Lakshmi Hospital and others.