CHARAN SINGH Vs. KHOSLA HOSPITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Charan Singh, complainant having failed before the District Forum to establish negligence and deficiency of the 'eye Surgeon' in operating his right eye, is in appeal. Present is the case where the complainant has challenged the care, attention, skill and earnestness of the operating surgeon in every respect, from all angles.

(2.) The complainant's case is that he was suffering from cataract in his right eye, he contacted Dr. Vikram Khosla, who opined that 'cataract operation' was the only remedy and after the operation, he will be able to see clearly. On the advice of the doctor, he agreed to get his eye operated after various tests on payment of Rs.3,500/-. Dr. Vikram Khosla performed the operation on the right eye of the complainant on 20.10.1996. After the operation he was discharged from the hospital. It has been alleged that pursuant to the advice of Dr. Vikram Khosla, the complainant attended the eye O. P. D. but the operated eye was not cured. He could get no relief from the irritation in eye, unbearable headache though injections and medicines were prescribed. Post-operative care was not rendered as the doctor remained out of station without any prior notice which gave much trouble to the patient. On his return to the hospital, doctor advised for second operation on 5.11.1996 to which the complainant agreed but he could get no relief as he lost his eye-sight completely and permanently leaving his eye swollen abnormally. Dr. Vikram Khosla advised the patient to go to Medical College, Amritsar. The opinion of doctor at the Medical College, Amritsar was also negative so he approached 'thind Eye Hospital, Jalandhar' on 18.11.1996. After examining his right eye, the doctor opined that his right eye-sight has been lost due to the negligence of the doctor. The complainant's allegation is that two successive operations performed by Dr. Vikram Khosla were done in a negligent way, there was prescription of wrong medicines, absence of post-operative care which further augmented his misery. He alleges to have suffered mentally and physically by the negligent eye treatment given to him by Dr. Vikram Khosla. Therefore, he claimed a compensation of Rs.4,17,500/- alongwith the interest @ 18% as per the details given in the complaint.

(3.) The case was contested by Dr. Vikram Khosla, denying the allegations of the complainant. The complainant was operated and was discharged on the same day i. e.20th October, 1996. It is stated that such like surgery is minor operation in which admission of the patient is not necessary. He performed the operation in accordance with the medical precedent with due care, caution and attention and the operation was successful. The instructions were given not to do hard job and have complete bed rest. It has been denied if there was any negligence on the part of respondent in performing the surgery or afterwards at any stage. Post-operative care involved dressing and prescribing of medicines which was carried out. According to the respondent, the complainant did not follow the instructions given to him after the discharge from the hospital, as a result of which the complainant received injuries in the operated eye as he started doing manual work and heavy duties. This fact was disclosed by the complainant himself and other attendants of the complainant who approached him. The allegation that he was out of station is false as he attended to all his patients and also attended the free eye camp and had examined the patients at his residence for follow-up treatment even after the complainant had an accident at home. It has been denied if any second operation was performed on 5.11.1996, rather treatment of repairing of eye was given to the complainant after his accident at home. It has been stated that he never referred him to Medical College, Amritsar. The complainant's visit to Thind Hospital, Jalandhar is also not known to him. Furthermore, the complainant being chronic diabetic, was having more risk factor in such surgery but utmost care was taken and best treatment was given.