State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Dr. Inder Mohan Watts vs Sohan Lal(Deceased) Son Of Simbhu Rai on 21 September, 2010
2nd Bench
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,
SCO NOS.3009-12, SECTOR 22-D, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No. 484 of 2004
Date of institution : 4.5.2004
Date of Decision : 21.9.2010
Dr. Inder Mohan Watts, Watts Clinic, Nai Abadi, Street No. 2, Abohar Distt.
Ferozepur.
....Appellant.
Versus
1. Sohan Lal(deceased) son of Simbhu Rai resident of H. No. 1565, Street
No. O, Nai Abadi, Near Ram Dev Mandir, Abohar, Distt. Ferozepur now
represented through his L.Rs impleaded vide order dated 19.1.2010:-
i) Lachmi Devi wife of Sohan Lal, resident of House No. 1565, Street
No. O, Nai Abadi, Near Ram Dev Mandir, Abohar, Distt. Ferozepur
ii) Dr. Santosh Rani wife of Sunil Kumar, resident of Street No. 4,
Sanwana Basti, Bathinda
iii) Jyoti wife of Vinod Kumar, resident of Sanjay Nagar, Gali No. 18,
Bathinda
iv) Pooja wife of Raj Kumar, resident of Sanjay Nagar, Gali No. 18,
Bathinda
v) Suman daughter of Sohan Lal, resident of House No. 1565, Street
No. ), Nai Abadi, Ram Dev Mandir, Abohar, District Ferozepur
vi) Rajinder Kumar son of Sohan Lal, resident of House No. 1565,
Street No.0, Nai Abadi, Ram Dev Mandir, Abohar, District Ferozepur
vii) Satish Kumar son of Sohan Lal, resident of House No. 1565, Street
No.0, Nai Abadi, Ram Dev Mandir, Abohar, District Ferozepur
2. Dr. G.R. Garg c/o Civil Hospital, Abohar, Distt. Ferozepur.
3. Dr. Sandeep Chauhan c/o Aastha Kidney Hospital, 2A-32, Sukhadia
Nagar, Sriganganagar (Raj.)
4. Dr. Bhupinder Bhutna c/o Aastha Kidney Hospital, 2A-32, Sukhadia
Nagar, Sriganganagar (Raj.)
...Respondents.
First Appeal against the order dated 11.3.2004 of
the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Ferozepur.
Before:-
Shri Inderjit Kaushik, Presiding Member.
Shri Piare Lal Garg, Member.
Present:-
For the appellant : Sh. Sandeep Suri, Advocate
For respondent No.1 : Sh. Munish Goel, Advocate
For respondent No.2 : Ex.-parte.
For respondents No.3&4 : None.
First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 2
INDERJIT KAUSHIK, PRESIDING MEMBER:
This order will dispose of two appeals i.e. First Appeal No.484 of 2004(Dr. Inder Mohan Watts Vs. Sohan Lal) and First Appeal No. 493 of 2004(Sohan Lal Vs. Dr. Inder Mohan Watts) as the same are preferred against the same impugned order dated 11.3.2004 of the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ferozepur(in short 'the District Forum'). The appeals are being disposed of with a single order as the grounds in both the appeals are interlinked. The facts are taken from 'First Appeal No.484 of 2004' filed by Dr. Inder Mohan Watts and the parties would be referred by their status in this appeal.
2. The facts in brief are that the respondent/complainant-Sohan Lal(hereinafter called 'the complainant') filed complaint against the appellant and others stating that the complainant suffered abdomen pain and fever and he went to the clinic of appellant, who is an R.M.P. doctor in first week of September, 2003 and remained under his treatment upto 20.9.2003. The appellant administered anti-biotic and injections to the complainant but due to his carelessness and negligence, intra-mascular injection administered by the appellant to the complainant damaged his artery and there was infection at the site of the injection. The said injection was given in the presence of Naresh Kumar, Nitin Sharma and Sunny Kumar. Puss formation took place at the place of injection. Appellant tried to control the situation and advised the complainant for an ultra sound test from M/s Goyal Ultrasound, Gaushalla Road, Abohar in order to check the presence of any stone in the Gall Blader. The Ultra Sound Test was conducted by Dr. Sobha Ram Goyal on 15.9.2003 but the condition of the complainant did not improve. Complainant got admitted himself in Civil Hospital, Abohar where he was examined by Dr. G.R. Garg and complainant remained in the hospital for 4 days and Dr. G.R. Garg diagnosed the case of 'Abscess" at the site of injection. At the time of First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 3 admission in the hospital, there was heavy swelling and acute pain at the right portion of the thigh which further spread over to the left thigh of the complainant and the complainant was referred to Aastha Kidney Hospital, Sriganga Nagar. Complainant was admitted in the hospital of respondent No. 3 on 30.9.2003 in a critical condition. Respondent No. 3 examined the complainant and found there was Abscess at right gluteal region and tender cellulites at left thigh and treated the complainant from 30.9.2003 to 10.10.2003. The complainant was operated by respondent No. 4 on 30.9.2003 at right gluteal region and on left thigh on 5.10.2003.
3. The complainant sought discharge from respondents No.3 & 4 as he was unable to bear the expenses any more. Complainant spent huge amount of Rs. 65,000/- for getting the treatment from Sriganga Nagar and suffered physical pain, mental agony and harassment due to the negligence and carelessness of appellant for more than three months. Complainant also remained bed ridden and could not earn his livelihood and suffered Rs. 25,000/- for that and prayed that Rs. 75,000/- be awarded incurred on the treatment, Rs. 2 lacs as compensation and Rs. 25,000/- as loss of earning and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 1500/-.
4. Appellant filed the reply taking objections that the complaint is full of lies and has been filed to harass and humiliate the appellant. The dispute is not a consumer dispute and complainant has concocted the story by concealing material facts. The complicated question of law and fact is involved and the District Forum has no jurisdiction. On merits, it was admitted that the complainant came to the appellant and complained abodomen pain in epigastric region and the appellant advised the complainant for Ultra Sound of his Gall Bladder before starting any treatment and thereafter the complainant did not come to him. No injection was given to the complainant. There is no entry in the name of the complainant in O.P.D. register duly maintained by the appellant. It was First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 4 admitted that the appellant had given a slip to advise the complainant for having Ultra Sound Test to check the presence of stone in the Gall Bladder. The complainant maintains the record of his patients. Academically an intra muscular injection cannot damage any artery. The complainant has setup a false story. The perusal of the treatment report of the complainant of Aastha Kidney Hospital, Sriganga Nagar clearly reveals that blood sugar was uncontrolled, which was basic cause of septicemia & multiple abscess and cellulites. Injection can give abscess at one place(i.e. Gluteal region) but not opposite thigh. So cellulites on left thigh and abscess of right Gluteal region(hip) was more suggestive of septicemia in the case of complainant. Complainant served a notice and the reply was also given. Denying other allegations and prayed that complaint be dismissed.
5. In the reply filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, similar objections were taken in addition to that the complaint is bad for mis- joinder of parties. On merits, it was pleaded that complainant vide O.P.D. slip No. 73954 dated 20.9.2003 came to the Civil Hospital, Abohar and Dr. Baldev Raj of Civil Hospital, Abohar referred the complainant to answering respondent No. 2 for E.C.G. and medical check up on 22.9.2003 and complainant visited answering respondent No. 2 on 23.9.2003. Complainant was suffering from high blood pressure and treatment was given to him and advised admission.
6. Complainant in the company of his relative Sunil Kumar got admitted in Civil Hospital, Abohar on 29.9.2003 at about 2.15 p.m. vide admission No. 5876 and was found suffering from Diabetes(DM), Hypertension(HT), Cholecystitis(Gall Bladder stone) and injection abscess. Complainant was diagnosed for other disease for 1-½ years and injection abscess for 10 days. The condition of the complainant was serious and reported that some RMP Doctor had given him injection for cholecystitis. First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 5
7. On 30.9.2003, Sunil Kumar took patient for getting and treated from some other un-disclosed place or the station and noted on the hospital record for his own handwriting/signature. Answering respondent is qualified Doctor and his M.B.B.S., M.D.(Medicine) and has vast experience and is doing medical profession for the last about 26 years. Answering respondent treated the complainant to the best of his knowledge, skill, care and wisdom and as per need. After 30.9.2003, the complainant never met the answering respondent nor showed any reports to him and prayed that complaint be dismissed.
8. Learned District Forum after considering the evidence and material placed on file by the parties and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, accepted he complaint by observing that complainant had to suffer for long as a result of administration of an injection to him by the appellant without any proper diagnosis and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation to the complainant for his treatment, Rs. 1,500/- as costs. However, the complaint against respondents No. 2, 3 & 4 was dismissed.
9. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 11.3.2004, the appellant/opposite party No. 1 has filed First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 and the complainant - Sohan Lal filed First Appeal No. 493 of 2004 for the enhancement of compensation.
10. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as respondent No. 1 and have gone through the file and documents placed on record with the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant and respondent No.1.
11. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that there are allegations of wrong treatment but it is not proved on record that any injection was given by the appellant. The complainant has died and his L.Rs are on record. Learned District Forum has mentioned in the order First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 6 under appeal that the complainant remained under treatment of the appellant from 15.9.2003 to 28.9.2003 but as per the reply filed by respondent No. 2 complainant was admitted in Civil Hospital, Abohar on 20.9.2003 and then was referred to Aastha Kidney Hospital, Sriganga Nagar on 30.9.2003. The complainant was diagnosed as a case of septicemia. On 29.9.2003, he was admitted in Civil Hospital, Abohar and was discharged on 30.9.2003. The complainant has failed to place on record any evidence to prove his case and is not entitled to any compensation, expenses, costs much less the enhancement of the compensation, costs and the expenses of the bills and the appeal should be accepted and the complaint may be dismissed.
12. On behalf of the complainant, it was contended that the appellant has admitted that the complainant came to him and he advised the Ultra Sound Test and further argued that in fact it was the appellant, who administered injection on the right thigh of the complainant and due to carelessness and negligence, the artery was cut and puss formation took place. Dr. G.R. Garg diagnosed a case of abscess at the site of injection. Dr. Bhupinder Bhutna also found that the complainant was a case of acute renal failure and un-controlled blood sugar and right gluteal abscess and cellulites left thigh. Dr. Sandeep Chauhan also gave the similar opinion and it was the appellant, who administered wrong injection and the complainant has been awarded the compensation and the costs but the same are inadequate as the complainant has spent huge amount on the treatment and also suffered loss of salary of Rs. 25,000/- and mental torture, harassment at the hands of the appellant and the compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- more should have been awarded.
13. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. One fact is clear that the complainant Sohan Lal since deceased firstly came to appellant on 15.9.2003 and took treatment First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 7 and it was the appellant, who administered the injection on the thigh of the complainant and also advised Ultra Sound Examination for whole of the abdomen which is clear from the report of Goyal Ultra Sound as per which on 15.9.2003 Dr. Manoj Watts referred Mr. Sohan Lal patient for Ultra Sound Examination. Sohan Lal remained under his treatment upto 20.9.2003 and thereafter on 20.9.2003 Sohan Lal came to Civil Hospital, Abohar and he was referred by Dr. Baldev Raj of Civil Hospital, Abohar to Dr. G.R. Garg of Civil Hospital, Abohar for E.C.G. and Medical check-up and thereafter he was referred to Aastha Kidney Hospital on 30.9.2003.
14. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that no injection was given by the appellant and the "abscess" could be due to the blood sugar, does not cut much ice because before going to Aastha Kidney Hospital, the abscess was because of the injection given by the appellant without making proper diagnosis. The complainant had no enmity with the appellant and after taking treatment from the appellant when the deceased went to Dr. G.R. Garg, the abscess has already developed on the site of the injection. Dr. Sandeep Chauhan of Aastha Kidney Hospital has also given similar opinion. Learned District Forum has rightly observed that the appellant has denied the material facts and did not disclose the true facts.
15. We do not find any ground or reason to interfere in the impugned order dated 11.3.2004 under appeal of the learned District Forum and we are also not inclined to enhance the compensation already awarded by the learned District Forum and both the appeals are dismissed. Impugned order of the District Forum is upheld. No order as to costs.
16. The arguments in these appeals were heard on 13.9.2010 and the orders were reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 8
17. The appellant of First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 had deposited an amount of Rs. 25,000/- with this Commission at the time of filing of the appeal. This amount of Rs. 25,000/- with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the Legal heirs of respondent No. 1 Sohan Lal(deceased) i.e. (i) to (vii) in First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days under intimation to the learned District Forum and to the appellant Dr. Inder Mohan Watts.
18. The interest on the amount of Rs. 25,000/- shall stop running with effect from the date the appellant had deposited the same in this Commission. Interest on this amount of Rs. 25,000/- shall be what has accrued on this amount when it remained deposited by this Commission in the Bank.
19. Remaining amount shall be paid by the appellant of First Appeal No. 484 of 2004 to the above mentioned respondents within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of the order.
20. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of Court cases.
21. Copy of this order be placed on First Appeal No. 493 of 2004(Sohan Lal Vs. Dr. Inder Mohan Watts).
(Inderjit Kaushik)
Presiding Member
September 21, 2010. (Piare Lal Garg)
as Member