State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sikander @ Munna Mubarak Pathan vs Dr. Rohini Sharad Vaidya on 18 June, 2015
1 F.A.No.:465/2012
Date of filing :23.10.2012
Date of order :18.06.2015
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL
COMMISSION,MUMBAI, CIRCUIT BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
FIRST APPEAL NO. :465 OF 2012
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 52 of 2011
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM :OSMANABAD.
Sikandar @ Munna S/oMubarak Pathan,
R/o Pali, Tq. & Dist.Beed. ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
Dr.Rohini Sharad Vaidya,
Anand Hospital, Jalna Road,
Beed. ...RESPONDENT.
CORAM : Mr.S.M.Shembole, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial
Member.
Smt.Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.
Present : Adv.S.N.Tandale for appellant,
Adv.H.V.Tungar for respondent.
O R A L JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 18th June 2015)
Per Mrs.Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.
1. Sikandar @ Munna S/o Mubarak Pathan appellant
herein/org.complainant challenges in this appeal dismissal of
complaint case No.52/2011 passed by District Consumer Forum
Osmanabad vide its order dated 14.8.2012.
2. Facts in nutshell are as under:-
Complainant Sikandar is husband of deceased Asma.
Complaint is regarding medical negligence on the part of respondent 2 F.A.No.:465/2012 Dr.Rohini Vaidya resident of Beed. It is stated by complainant that on 25.9.2007 complainant took his wife to the hospital of respondent as she was pregnant. At that time after checking the patient, respondent doctor prescribed medicines as under.
i) Cap.Imax Forte
ii) Tab.Momcal
iii) Tab.Sumo
She was asked to come for follow up after one month. Accordingly on 5.11.2007 complainant took his wife at the hospital of respondent. At that time some tablets were prescribed after conducting necessary tests. On 14.11.2007 again respondent prescribed same medicines without conducting any test. On 14.11.2007 Tab.Taxim-O,Tab- Temptale and Tab.Reziz were prescribed. It is therefore stated by complainant that after 14.11.2007 health of deceased Asma was deteriorated instead of any improvement. Therefore on 17.11.2007 respondent referred her to Government Hospital, Beed. At that time it was informed by doctors from the said hospital that deceased was suffering from hepatitis and they referred her to Government Hospital, Aurangabad. At Aurangabad Asma died on 21.11.2007. Therefore it is alleged by complainant that due to wrong medicines prescribed by respondent and due to deficiency in service on the part of respondent Asma died. Therefore complainant filed complaint alleging medical negligence on the part of respondent and claimed compensation of Rs.2 lakhs with 18% interest from 21.11.2007.
3. Respondent appeared before the Forum and resisted the claim on the ground that there is no negligence on the part of respondent. Every time deceased was directed to take medicines after conducting necessary tests. As deceased was suffering from hepatitis her death occurred due to severe hepatitis for which respondent is not at all liable. Complainant preferred the application before District 3 F.A.No.:465/2012 Consumer Forum to refer the complaint to medical expert. Accordingly complaint was referred for getting expert report to Swami Ramanand Teerth Rural Medical College and Hospital, Ambajogai, Dist.Beed. Dr.S.V.Birajdar, Dr.R.R.Survase and Dr.S.P.Vaidya were committee members who issued their report and according to said report death of Asma was caused due to "Acute Fulminant Hepatitis"
and death in case of said hepatitis occurred very fast. Disease is spreading very fast and medicines which were prescribed by respondent doctor were proper and correct. After getting said report District Consumer Forum dismissed the complaint .
4. Adv.S.N.Tandale appeared for appellant(Org.complainant) and Adv.H.V.Tungar appeared for respondent. It is submitted by Adv.Tandale that after the receipt of report of medical experts complainant filed application before District Consumer Forum seeking permission to cross examine the experts. But District Consumer Forum did not allow the same. It is therefore submitted by Adv.Tandale that opportunity was not given to the complainant to cross check the expert by that District Consumer Forum committed illegality while dismissing the complaint. Hence appeal be allowed by giving opportunity to the appellant to cross examine to medical expert.
5. Adv.Tungar appearing for respondent submitted that after registration of complaint about medical negligence against respondent District Consumer Forum rightly referred the matter to the medical expert of Swami Ramanand Medical College and Hospital and said report was obtained on the request of complainant only. Therefore application to cross examine the said experts was not allowed by District Consumer Forum correctly and properly. Even otherwise as per expert report deceased Asma died due to Acute Fulminant Hepatitis and medicines prescribed by respondent were proper and correct. No counter evidence was filed by complainant to show that said medical expert report was not proper and correct. Therefore 4 F.A.No.:465/2012 District Consumer Forum has rightly dismissed the complaint . Hence appeal be dismissed.
6. We heard counsel for both side and perused the record. Case of complainant is that medicines prescribed by respondent were not correct and proper. Expert's evidence i.e. report issued by expert committee clearly concluded that medicines prescribed by respondent were correct and proper. It cannot be said that due to said medicines death of Asma had occurred. Committee came to conclusion that cause of death of Asma is Acute Fulminant Hepatitis. This disease spreads very fast and due to this disease, death occurs very fast and for that purpose medicines prescribed by respondent were suitable. In our view when expert evidence is clearly stated that respondent is not liable for any deficiency and no counter evidence was produced by complainant to challenge the said evidence. At the most complainant ought to have supplied questionaries to the expert doctors. But complainant failed to do so. In our view District Consumer Forum rightly appreciated the facts and evidence while dismissing the complaint . We do not want to disturb the reasons recorded by the Forum. Hence we the following order.
O R D E R
1. Appeal is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
3. Copies of the judgment be supplied to both the parties.
Sd/- Sd/- Uma S.Bora, S.M.Shembole, Member Presiding Judicial Member Mane