State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Shri Mansing Rama Khade vs Dr.Ramesh Rajaram Bhoite on 20 January, 2009
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI FIRST APPEAL NO. 1688 OF 2006 Date of filing : 22/08/2006 IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 87 OF 2004 Date of order : 20/01/2009 ADDL. DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : PUNE Shri Mansing Rama Khade R/o. 205, Shukrawar Peth, Neharu Nagar Phaltan, Tal. Phaltan, Dist. Satara. Appellant/org. complainant V/s. Dr.Ramesh Rajaram Bhoite R/o. Giriraj Hospital & Intensive Care Unit, Indapur Road, Near S.T. Stand Baramati, Tal. Baramati, Dist. Pune. Respondent/org. O.P. Corum : Justice Mr.B.B. Vagyani, Honble President Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Judicial Member
Present: Mr.J.I. Shaikh, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr.P.M. Gore, Advocate for the respondent.
- : ORDER :-
Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Judicial Member This appeal arises out of judgement/award dated 16/08/2006 passed by Addl. District Consumer Forum Pune in consumer complaint No.87/2004, Mansing Rama Khade V/s. Ramesh Rajaram Bhoite. By the impugned award, complaint, which was for recovery of compensation due to deficiency in service and negligence on the part of respondent/O.P.-Dr.Ramesh Bhoite in medical treatment to the complainant, stood dismissed along with compensatory cost of Rs.1,000/- levelled on the complainant and feeling aggrieved thereby the complainant preferred this appeal.
It is the case of the complainant that he met with an accident while going on his Moped M-80 on 19/10/2002. After the accident, Traffic Police, who reached there gave blow on right side of complainants ear and as a result of which there was bleeding from his ear. He was admitted in the hospital of Dr.Ramesh Bhoite, but he was wrongly treated. Though he had no complain or any medical problem at his neck, he was operated there. On 11/03/2003 he paid total hospital charges of Rs.49,140/- and also spent Rs.14,846.96 towards medicine, total amounting to Rs.63,986.96. Consent of his wife and son was not taken by O.P. when he was operated. Therefore, complainant filed this consumer complaint claiming Rs.3 Lakhs towards mental torture, Rs.2 Lakhs towards physical torture, Rs.63,986.96 towards hospital charges and medicine and Rs.2,000/- as cost.
O.P. appeared and filed his written reply denying allegations. According to him, after meeting with accident, complainant was taken to Local Heath Centre and looking to his critical condition, he was advised to be taken to District Hospital. His relatives decided to admit complainant to the hospital of O.P. considering that the condition of complainant was not too sound to undertake travel to the District place. He was properly treated. There was an injury to his brain. He had internal haemorrhage. Due to vomiting he suffered Aspiration Pneumonia and to meet the complication, he was required to undergo Tracheastomy. He was attended by the expert doctors related to his illness and complications and was treated properly. As a part of it, he was also required to be kept on ventilator. There was no negligence in the treatment of the complainant. The complaint is malafide, as such compensatory costs were pressed.
We heard Mr.J.I. Shaikh, Advocate for the appellant/org. complainant and Mr.P.M. Gore, Advocate for the respondent/org. O.P. We perused the record including record of original complaint file, as all the documents referred were not produced in appeal memo.
There is hardly any evidence adduced on behalf of complainant to substantiate his grievance. Established facts revealed that after meeting with accident, complainant was admitted to Local Heath Centre, where looking to his critical condition, he was advised to be taken to District Hospital. However, his Brother-in-law, a responsible person attending to him, took a decision to admit him to the hospital of O.P. since condition of the complainant was not so good to be shifted to District place. This Brother-in-law after receiving full information about condition of the complainant, gave his consent for the treatment. Said consent is placed on record. Since complainant was in unconscious condition when was admitted to the hospital of O.P., it was not expected for him to know whether his wife or son were available or not to give consent on the form. But, his Brother-in-law being elder and responsible person in the family, certainly has taken necessary decision at that particular point of time. Further, his entire case papers, treatment papers and opinions of all experts, who attended complainant during his illness for his various ailments and complications supported the case of O.P. and negatives the case of the complainant. Learned Forum below rightly considering all these material, dismissed the complaint and also awarded compensatory cost. We find no reason to interfere with it. Thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, following order is passed :-
-: ORDER :-
1.
Appeal stands dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/-.
2. Record & Proceeding be sent back to the District Consumer Forum.
3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
(S.R. Khanzode) (B.B. Vagyani) Judicial Member President dd.