State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Niraj Kumar vs Dr. Hulesh Mandle on 1 February, 2018
CHHATTISGARH STATE
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PANDRI, RAIPUR (C.G.)
Complaint Case No.CC/2017/54
Instituted on : 01.07.2017
Neeraj Kumar, Aged about 31 years,
S/o Satyendra Kumar,
R/o : Jaihind Chowk,
Lodhipara Chowk, Pandri,
Raipur (C.G.) ..... Complainant.
Vs.
Dr. Hulesh Mandle, M.D.
Consultant Radiologist,
Ramkrishna Care, Pachpedi, Raipur,
Dhamtari Road, District Raipur (C.G.). ...... Opposite Party
PRESENT: -
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.S. SHARMA, PRESIDENT
HON'BLE SHRI D.K. PODDAR, MEMBER
HON'BLE SHRI NARENDRA GUPTA, MEMBER
COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES: -
Shri Dilip Jha, Advocate for the complainant.
None for the opposite party.
ORDER
Dated : 01/February/2018 PER :- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.S. SHARMA, PRESIDENT. The complainant filed this consumer complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the O.P. seeking following reliefs :-
(a) To direct the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand) towards financial loss suffered by the complainant due to negligence committed by the O.P. // 2 //
(b) To direct the O.P. to pay to pay a sum of Rs.24,50,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand) towards compensation for mental and physical agony and well as for hurdle caused in work of the complainant.
(c) The O.P. be directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) towards cost of litigation.
(d) To grant any other relief, which this Commission deems fit..
2. Briefly stated the facts of the complaint of the complainant are that on 12.05.2015 the complainant was having pain in his abdomen and internal physical pain, therefore, he was got admitted in Avanti Hospital. The complainant was advised for sonography of the abdomen and to go to B.S.R. Pathology Lab, where the sonography of the complainant was performed. In the report of the above lab dated 12.05.2015 it is shown that in the left kidney of the complainant there is an stone and thereafter the complainant was taking medicines from his doctor, but from the medicines, pain was not removed and treatment of stone, is not possible through medication. The complainant was suffering from pain in his abdomen, therefore, to cure from the above problem, he went to Ramkrishna Care Hospital and was got examined. The O.P. advised the complainant for obtaining further sonography report. On 19.05.2015, the sonography of abdomen of the complainant was conducted by the O.P. and the // 3 // sonograpy report to the effect that there is no abnormality and stone in the abdomen of the complainant, was provided. The complainant was ensured and he did not contact anywhere for treatment. The O.P. institution is a reputed Hospital of Raipur and in the O.P. hospital there is availability of team of the experienced doctors, therefore, the complainant believed on them and came to his home. Again on the next day the complainant was having pain in his abdomen, he went to Vidya Kidney Hospital, Shankar Nagar, Raipur for examination of his abdomen where the doctors of Vidya Kidney Hospital advised the complainant for conducting ultra sonography of the entire abdomen. From the ultrasonogrpahy report obtained from Vidya Kidney Hospital and from the advice of the doctors of Vidya Kidney Hospital, the complainant came to know that in his left kidney, there is stone. From the above circumstances, it is clear that due to stone, there was swelling in left kidney of the complainant due to which he has to bear unbearable pain and it was advised that the treatment for the same be taken from the doctors of Vidya Kidney Hospital. Thereafter Apollo Diagnostic Centre, Raipur confirmed that the complainant is having stone. The complainant went to Raipur Stone Clinic and had undergone operation through laser procedure. The stone was removed and there was improvement in swelling in left kidney. Prior to 12.05.2015 when sonography report was received, stone was present and there was swelling in the kidney, but in the sonography // 4 // report dated 19.05.2015 issued by the O.P. it was reported that there is no abnormality and swelling in the kidney and thre is no stone. The O.P. did not take precautions while conducting sonography. The O.P. provide report that there was no stone in abdomen and there is no swelling in the kidney and the complainant was advised to live normal life. When the complainant again suffered pain in the abdomen, he came to know that there is stone and there is swelling in the kidney and he was shocked. Due to medical negligence committed by the O.P., problems created in the life of the complainant. The O.P. committed medical negligence. The complainant sent legal notice to the O.P. on 21.12.2015 and demanded compensation, but vide reply dated 14.01.2016 the advocate of the O.P. refused to pay any compensation. Hence, the instant complaint.
3. None appeared for the O.P. inspite of service of notice by registered A.D. Post., therefore, no written statement, affidavits and documents have been filed by the O.P.
4. The complainant has filed documents. Annexure 1 is test report dated 12.05.2015 issued by Avanti Multi Speciality Hospital, Annexure
- 2 is Whole Abdomen Sonography Report issued by BSR Diagnostic dated 12.05.2015, Annexure 3 is Outpatient bill cum receipt dated 19.05.2015, Annexure 4 is Sonogrpahy Report of the Abdomen dated 19.05.2015 issued by Ramkrishan Care Hospital, Raipur, Annexure 5 is prescription slip dated 19.05.2015 issued by Dr. Ajay Parashar, // 5 // Consultant, RKCH. Raipur, Annexure 6 is OPD record of Vidya Hospital, Raipur, Annexure 7 is prescription slip dated 20.05.2015 issued by Raipur Stone Clinic, Annexure 8 is Receipt dated 21.05.2015 issued by Apollo Diagnostic Centre and Ultrasonography Report of Whole Abdomen dated 21.05.2015, Annexure 9 is Receipt / Bill dated 06.05.2015 issued by Raipur Stone Clinic, Annexure 10 is registered notice dated31.12.2015 sent by Shri Anand Yadav, Advocate on behalf of the complainant to the O.P., Annexure 11 is postal receipt, Annexure 12 is acknowledgement, Annexure 13 is reply to legal notice dated 14.01.2016 sent by Rabiya Shaikh, Advocate on behalf of the O.P. to Mr. Anand Yadav, Aadhaar Card of the complainant.
5. The O.P. has not filed any documents.
6. Shri Dilip Jha, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has argued that on 12.05.2015, the complainant was having pain in his abdomen and he went to Avanti Hospital, where the complainant was advised for sonography of abdomen. The sonography was carried out by BSR Pathology Lab in which it is found that the left kidney of the complainant was having calculus / stone. The complainant was taking medicines but the pain was not removed, then the complainant went to Ramkrishna Care Hospitals and was got examined. The O.P. advised the complainant for obtaining further sonography report. On 19.05.2015, the sonography of abdomen of the complainant was done by the O.P. and the O.P. reported that there is no abnormality in the // 6 // kidney, but the pain in abdomen was not removed. Then the complainant went to Vidya Hospital Kidney Centre, Shankar Nagar, Raipur where again untrasonography of the entire abdomen of the complainant was done and it is found that the left kidney of the complainant was having calculus / stone. It appears that the O.P. has given wrong report, therefore, the complainant suffered mental agony. The O.P. committed medical negligence, hence the complainant is entitled to get compensation from the O.P., as prayed in the relief clause of the complaint.
7. None appeared for the O.P. in spite of service of notice, on 12.01.2018, when the case is fixed for final arguments.
8. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the complainant and have also perused the documents filed by the complainant in the complaint case.
9. In the instant case, in para 3 of the complaint, the complainant pleaded that the complainant went to Ramkrishna Care Hospitals, Raipur for treatment, but the Ramkrishna Care Hospitals, has not been made party. The complainant made party Dr. Hulesh Mandle, who carried out sonography of the complainant, mentioning that the O.P. is Consultant Radiologist of Ramkrishna Care, Pachpedi, Raipur.
10. The complainant has filed Discharge Ticket of Avanti Multi Speciality Hospital, Lodhipara Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) (document // 7 // Annexure 1) and Sonography Report dated 12.05.2015 of BSR Diagnostic Centre, Raipur (C.G.) (document Annexure 2). In the Sonogrpahy Report dated 12.05.2015, it is mentioned that :-
"LEFT KIDNEY : Left kidney appears normal in size , shape and echotexture.
Cortical thickness & corticomedullary differentiation normal. 9.7mm stone in middle calyx hydronephrosis left kidney."
11. The complainant has also filed document Annexure 6, which is Report of Vidya Hospital & Kidney Centre, Raipur in which it is mentioned thus :-
"Past History : DM ....................................................
HT PTB Calculus Lt Renal Calculus - Recently known.
Jaundice "
12. On the contrary the O.P. gave report that "Both Kidneys are normal in size, shape and position. Renal parenchymal echogenicities are normal. No evidence of calculus / pelvocalyceal dilation on either side."
// 8 //
13. The Sonography Report of BSR Diagnostics Centre, Raipur was given by Dr. R.N. Verma, M.D. Consultant Radiologist on 12.05.2015, the report was given by Vidya Hospital & Kidney Centre on 20.05.2015 and the report was given by the O.P. on 19.05.2015. The reports dated 12.05.2015 and 20.05.2015 were given by two different hospitals and the presence of stone in left kidney of the complainant, is confirmed by the above reports. The sonography report dated 19.05.2015 issued by the O.P. did not show presence of calculus / stone in the left kidney of the complainant. Looking to the reports of BSR Diagnostics Centre and Vidya Hospital & Kidney Centre, the report issued by O.P. is erroneous and certainly the O.P. has committed negligence while conducting sonography of the complainant. These two reports show presence of stone in the left kidney of the complainant. The report issued by the O.P. did not show presence of stone in the left kidney of the complainant. In these circumstances, it can safely be presumed that the complainant has suffered mental agony, therefore, the complainant is entitled to get compensation from the O.P.
14. The complainant has prayed for Rs.35,000/- for medical negligence, Rs.24,50,000/- towards compensation for mental and physical agony and Rs.15,000/- towards cost of litigation.
15. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is just and proper to award lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) towards compensation along with interest @ 9% p.a. from // 9 // the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 01.07.2017 till realization, in favour of the complainant and against the O.P. It is also just and proper to award a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) towards cost of litigation, to the complainant. The rest of the relief sought by the complainant, is denied.
16. Therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant against the O.P., is partly allowed and it is directed that :-
(i) The O.P. will pay lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) towards compensation to the complainant, within 30 days from the date of this order.
(ii) The O.P. will pay interest @ 9% p.a. on Rs.50,000/- to the complainant, from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 01.07.2017 till realization.
(iii) The O.P. will pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand) towards cost of litigation, to the complainant.
(Justice R.S. Sharma) (D.K. Poddar) (Narendra Gupta)
President Member Member
01 /02/2018 01 /02/2018 01/02/2018