State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Dr. G.V.S. Thirupathi Reddy vs Smt. Vemula Satyavathi on 11 June, 2011
BEFORE THE A BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD. F.A. 1394/2007 against C.C. 176/2005, Dist. Forum, Karimnagar. Between: 1. Dr. G.V.S. Thirupathi Reddy Doctor in Tirumala Super Specialities Hospital, 3-1-301, Old Employment Office, Behind Civil Hospital Karimnagar. 2. Aakula Venkanna, Proprietor, Tirumala Super Specialities Hospital, 3-1-301, Old Employment Office, Behind Civil Hospital Karimnagar. *** Appellants/ Ops. And Smt. Vemula Satyavathi W/o. Badraiah, Age: 37 years Household, H.No. 3-3-184/42 Koti Complex, Peddapalli, Karimnagar Dist. *** Respondent/ Complainant Counsel for the Appellants : M/s. S. Surya Prakasa Rao. Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. M. Ramgopal Reddy. CORAM: HONBLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT. & SMT.M.SHREESHA, LADY MEMBER.
FRIDAY, THIS THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND TEN ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President.) ***
1) This is an appeal preferred by OP1 Proprietor and OP2 doctor of Tirumala Super Specialties Hospital at Karimnagar against the order of the Dist. Forum awarding compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs and costs.
2) The case of the complainant in brief is that she is a resident of Peddapalli town. On 31.3.2005 she consulted a local doctor Dr. P. Mallesham who directed her to consult the appellant in order to have blood transfusion. Accordingly she went to the appellant hospital on 1.4.2005 where she was admitted as in-patient for blood transfusion. The laboratory attached to the hospital took her blood in order to know the blood group. It was shown as B-negative vide Ex. A2. Earlier her blood group was reported as B-positive at Peddapalli local hospitals. Basing on the report the appellant requisitioned 10 units (350 ml) of blood B-negative from Sanjeevani Blood Bank and another 10 units (350 ml) of the very same blood group from Chalemda Anand Rao Institute of Medial Sciences, Karimnagar. 20 units of blood was transfused and she was discharged on 3.4.2005. Suddenly she fell sick, vomited blood. Immediately she was shifted to the appellant hospital where she was not given proper treatment. On that she was shifted to another hospital Pabba Super Specialty Hospital, Karimnagar. On 8.4.2005 Dr. Kylash Pubba advised her to go to Osmania Hospital, Hyderabad for further treatment. However, she was shifted to Poulomi Hospitals, Hyderabad. She was treated as in-patient by Dr. Tapesh Bansal, Physician till 21.4.2005. She incurred an amount of Rs. 1 lakh for the treatment. All this was due to negligence on the part of appellants.
Therefore she claimed Rs. 2 lakhs towards compensation, Rs. 2 lakhs towards expenditure, and Rs. 1 lakh towards costs in all Rs. 5 lakhs.
3) O.P. No. 1filed counter denying each and every allegation made in the complaint. He alleged that she was treated with due care and caution. He advised her to bring blood for transfusion. She on her own accord went to the laboratory, got herself tested. As per the report she and her relatives got the blood from Sanjeevani Blood Bank and also from Chelmada Hospital, Karimnagar. The blood units were brought by the complainant which he had transfused after receiving the laboratory reports. If the blood is not suitable it would react immediately. There was no reaction in the body of the complainant. There was no negligence on his part. Therefore he prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4) O.P. No. 2while adopting the counter of appellant No. 1 denied any negligence. It admitted that the complainant was admitted in the hospital for blood transfusion. As per the tests conducted in the laboratory the blood group of the complainant is B-negative. As per the report only the lab technician issued blood requisition and the relatives of the complainant procured the blood from Sanjeevani blood bank and Chalimeda Anand Rao Institute of Medial Sciences at Karimangar. After getting it tested and on matching of the samples the blood was transfused. There was no negligence on its part. No complication whatsoever was developed during transfusion she was discharged after she became quite normal. She was never admitted after discharge nor did they direct her to be taken to some other hospital. It denied that the complainant had visited various hospitals where it was opined that all was wrong blood transfusion. The blood of her relatives was transfused and there was no negligence on its part while transfusing the blood. Therefore it prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
5) The complainant in proof of her case examined herself as PW1 and got Exs. A1 to A131 marked while the appellants did not examine themselves nor filed any record.
6) The Dist. Forum after considering the evidence placed on record opined that the laboratory attached to the appellant hospital gave incorrect blood group report which was transfused to the complainant. On that she developed complications. She was admitted in different hospitals and spent amounts. Therefore a compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs was awarded together with costs.
7) Aggrieved by the said decision, the opposite parties preferred the appeal contending that the Dist. Forum did not appreciate the facts in correct perspective. When the blood was transfused as per the report issued by the laboratory attached to their hospital her condition was improved and she was discharged from the hospital. The subsequent records do not show that she had developed complications due to wrong blood transfusion and had taken treatment. The record shows that she was admitted for treatment of Asthma or Tuberculosis but was not due to wrong transfusion of blood. There is no evidence to show that she had suffered due to transfusion of wrong blood group. Therefore they prayed that the order of the Dist. Forum be set-aside.
8) The points that arise for consideration are:
i) Whether the appellant gave incorrect report of her blood group?
ii) Whether the complainant has suffered due to wrong blood transfusion?
iii) Whether the complainant is entitled to any compensation?
If so to what amount?
iv) To what relief?
9) It is an undisputed fact that the complainant was admitted in appellant hospital on 1.4.2005 for treatment of Asthma on a reference made by Dr. P. Mallesham, consultant physician at her native place Peddapalli who directed transfusion of B(positive) blood vide Ex. A4. When her blood was sent to the clinical laboratory attached to the hospital it has mentioned her blood group & RH as B (negative) vide Haematology report Ex. A2 dt. 1.4.2005. On the previous day when her blood was tested at Paddapalli in Life Line Pathological Laboratory, the blood group was mentioned as B (positive) vide Ex. A1 Dt. 31.3.2005. The appellant hospital issued requisition to Sanjeevani Blood Bank to supply 10 units of B(negative) blood vide Ex. A6. According to her on the next day 10 units of blood was transfused after purchasing it from Chalemda Anand Rao Institute of Medical Sciences, Karimnagar. She was discharged from the hospital on 3.4.2005. However, her condition was deteriorated. She was coughing; blood came out of her mouth. Again she went to the appellant hospital on 5.4.2005. Some medicines were administered and was treated by the appellant till 8.4.2005. As the condition was not improved and as the doctor was not there she went to Dr. Pabba Kailash who examined and advised her to go to a hospital at Hyderabad for better treatment. On that she went to Poulomi Hospitals, Hyderabad on 9.4.2005 where she was examined. Again blood test was conducted where it was found to be B (positive). Then the doctors at Poulomi Hospitals conducted transfusion of blood of B (positive). She was in the hospital from 9.4.2005 to 21.4.2005. Due to wrong transfusion of blood she had suffered. Her health condition was deteriorated and still she is taking treatment.
10) There is no dispute that the report that was issued under Ex. A2 mentioning her blood group was B (negative) was wrong. Earlier Dr. P. Mallesh got her blood tested found that her blood group was B (positive).
Subsequently when her blood was sent for examination by Poloumi Hospitals, Hyderabad it was found that she was B (positive) vide Ex. A3 dt. 9.4.2005.
11) The question is whether due to incorrect report and blood transfusion her health was adversely affected?
12) Her allegation that her condition has become serious and deteriorated due to transfusion of wrong blood group is obviously false. Before blood transfusion haemoglobin content was 4.2 gms, and after transfusion it came to 6.0 gms. It is not the case of the complainant that there was immediate reaction. She was in the hospital and later was discharged. She was admitted in Poloumi hospital on 8.4.2005 and was discharged on 21.4.2005. The doctors found that she was severely anaemic and was suffering from Asthma. She was advised to go for a higher centre for better treatment. It did not mention that there was some complications due to blood transfusion evidenced from Exs. A11 to A14.
She was admitted in Poloumi hospital on 9.4.2005 vide Ex. A17. When she was tested she has 3.5 gms of haemoglobin. Ultrasound of abdomen was taken vide Ex. A23 and it was found that it was normal. Poloumi hospital also transfused the blood evidenced from Exs. A32 to A38 On 11.4.2005 in fact she was given O (positive) blood evidenced under Ex.
A36. A number of tests were conducted.
No where it was stated that she had suffered due to blood transfusion. As we have earlier stated she was an anaemic and asthma patient. In Ex. A58 discharge summary the diagnosis was Vasculitis. It was mentioned chest X-ray showed bilateral alveolar shadows and a diagnosis of pulmonary haemorrhage was made. Blood transfused and patient became normal in one week. Also given Exdoxan for 3- 4weeks. All markers for vasculitis. Good pastures negative. In the coloumn treatment it was mentioned Steroids and supportive. Follows up : monthly.
13) In none of the reports marked as many as Exs. A60 to A70 there was a mention that she had complications due to blood transfusion. We may state that after taking treatment she became hale and healthy. Undoubtedly she might have spent huge expenditure vide Exs. A77 to A128. Solely on the ground that due to transfusion of wrong blood group all this had happened she filed complaint seeking compensation.
14) This is ex-facie false. In fact we had an occasion to consider the blood group compatibility chart. It reads as follows :
Blood Group Compatibility Chart Recipient's Blood group Can Accept Blood from:
Red Cells Whole Blood Plasma O +ve O +ve O -ve O +ve O -ve Any O, A, B or AB O
-ve O
-ve O
-ve Any O, A, B or AB A +ve A +ve, A -ve, O +ve or O -ve A +ve or A -ve Any A or AB A
-ve A
-ve or O -ve A
-ve Any A or AB B +ve B +ve, B -ve, O +ve or O -ve B +ve or B -ve Any B or AB B
-ve B
-ve or O -ve B
-ve Any B or AB AB +ve AB +ve, AB -ve A +ve, A -ve B +ve, B -ve O +ve or O-ve AB +ve or AB -ve Any AB AB
-ve AB
-ve, A -ve, B -ve or O -ve AB
-ve AB From the above it is very clear that she can accept the blood from either B+ve B-ve or O+ve, O-ve red cells and B+ve or B-ve of whole blood and plasma of any B or AB. It was mentioned that sometimes they do not get the required type of blood during emergency need. In that case they can use compatible blood groups to meet the emergency needs. She was admitted in Poloumi hospital on 8.4.2005 and was discharged on 21.4.2005.
Importantly neither the doctors at Pabba hospital nor the doctors at Poloumi hospital made a mention that all this was due to wrong group blood transfusion. They could not have stated so as the blood transfused was compatible blood. Had the blood been not compatible she would not have survived. She would have got adverse reaction immediately.
15) As we have earlier pointed out after blood transfusion her haemoglobin was in fact raised.
From the beginning she was anaemic and that was the reason why she was sent to a higher centre for transfusion of blood and treatment. The complainant did not examine any expert to show that due to transfusion of wrong blood group she had developed vasculitis etc.
16) Obviously after finding out that when blood of different group was administered, she hit upon the idea of filing the complaint to recover the entire amount of Rs. 2 lakhs spent for her ailment, asthma, vasculities by way of compensation. In view of the compatibility of the blood she could not have had any complication. When none of the doctors spoke about it, she could not have thought that it would be one of the reasons to have asthma and vasculities. She dare not sue when Polomi hospital transfused O blood group though she is B positive.
17) In a somewhat similar case in Madyaamgram Consumer Welfare Society Vs. Dr. Kalyan Kumar Chatarji & Others reported in 2002 (2) CPJ 381 where on account of false report of the laboratory the complainant did not suffer any injury, it was held that no compensation need be paid. What all the complainant would be entitled to is the amounts spent towards tests.
18) The appellant undoubtedly has given a wrong report despite the fact that earlier doctor while referring the patient to him categorically mentioned the blood group and the ailment with which she was suffering. She was referred for blood transfusion. The appellant alleges that the said referral letter was not shown to him.
This could not have been true.
The appellant knew full well that if the discharge summary maintained by the hospital is filed it would reveal that the complainant was examined on a reference by another doctor. The appellant is equally guilty in suppressing the record though compensation could not be granted solely on their conduct. The fact remains that the appellant has given wrong report, though the complainant did not suffer. The appellant is guilty of negligence for which some compensation has to be awarded lest it would resort to issuing wrong reports.
It has to be careful while issuing reports basing on which the doctors administer medicines and conduct treatment.
16) Considering the fact that nothing has happened to the complainant due to wrong report of blood group and it is a compatible blood group that was transfused, we are of the opinion that compensation can be awarded to the complainant for the negligent act of the appellant. The conduct of the complainant is equally blameworthy.
Without even consulting the doctor whether the blood that was transfused would cause any adverse affect on her health, she filed the complaint alleging her ailment was due to blood transfusion, a false complaint. Considering the fact that there was a mistake in reporting the wrong blood group, we are of the opinion that a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- can be awarded which we feel reasonable and modest in the circumstances. This would deter them to be cautious in future.
17) In the result the appeal is allowed in part modifying the order of the Dist. Forum. Compensation awarded at Rs. 3 lakhs with interest @ 9% p.a., is set-aside instead the appellant is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs. 1,000/- in the appeal. Time for compliance four weeks.
1) _______________________________ PRESIDENT
2) ________________________________ MEMBER Dt.
11. 06. 2010.
*pnr UP LOAD O.K.