N LALITHA KRISHNA Vs. DEEPA NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party in C. D. No.522/1997 on the file of the Ranga Reddy District Forum questioning the order of that District Forum dated 7.11.1998 in that C. D. directing her to pay a total compensation of Rs.10,500/- and also costs of Rs.500/- to the complainant in that C. D. within three months and in default to pay interest thereon @ 12% per annum from the date of the order i. e.7.11.1998. The complainant in the C. D. is the respondent before us.

(2.) The brief facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal are that the complainant approached the appellant for medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) within 5 to 6 weeks after she became pregnant and that the opposite party purported to perform MTP on her on 1.7.1997. But on subsequent Trans Abdominal Scan and Endovaginal Scan at ISMIT - Diagnostics on 8.7.1997 it was revealed that the foetus was intact and that it was continuing to grow. The complainant thereafter approached another doctor Dr. Sumalatha on 17.7.1997 and got abortion successfully performed by her on 18.7.1997 in Nagarjuna Maternity and Nursing Home. She then gave legal notice dated 12.9.1997 through her lawyer to the appellant claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and thereafter approached the Ranga Reddy District Forum by way of the present complaint on 6.11.1997 alleging that there was deficiency in service on the part of the appellant and that she should be compensated for the same by way of exemplary damages to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- for severe trauma, mental agony and physical pain.

(3.) The appellant received notice in the O. P. and filed her counter denying negligence and deficiency in service on her part and further contending that the case of subsequent abortion again on 18.7.1997 put up by the complainant was false, and also as follows : "the conduct of petitioner which shows the disinterest and refuse to stay in hospital for a minimum period of two days in hospital for observation and forcefully discharged within two hours and went with bleeding dress, which shows the gross negligence on the part of the petitioner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . the doctor has performed the MTP operation successfully with her vast experience and also advised to the petitioner to follow-up the medicines to stop the bleeding and pain continuously for one week, but in this case the petitioner did not stay with the hospital as in patient or sought advice from the doctor, but bluntly refused to medico advice the best reasons were known to petitioner. "