Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The Opposite party No.2 treated her with medicine and reassured that she would recover from all her health problems gradually. During her numerous visits, the 2nd O.P. failed to review her condition to ameliorate her sufferings. The prescription given by O.P.No.2 on 15.03.2003 (Ex.C4) would show that the complainant was suffering from breathlessness and other complications.

4. During the treatment period, since the complainant conceived, she attended Govt. Maternity Hospital, Puducherry and the treating Doctors prescribed medicines to her by taking note of her thyroid surgery she had undergone. The complainant and her husband reposed confidence on O.P.No.2 and never felt the necessity to obtain medical opinion from another doctor. Since there was no improvement in her health condition even after a year, the complainant on 16.08.2004 went to JIPMER Hospital and for the first time she came to know the nature of surgery done on her which was sub total thyrodectomy. During the sub total thyrodectomy surgery some nerves had damaged permanently and to relieve her from difficulty, she underwent tracheotomy on 27.08.2004 from JIPMER Hospital. By this tracheotomy procedure a Jackson metal tracheotomy tube of size 32 was inserted and she has to be with that tube throughout her life, which requires regular treatment to clean the tubes and ensure that she should not contract with any infection. According to the complainant, there was negligence in the post-operative treatment by way of both medical and psychological advice given to her. Due to O.P.2s negligence, the complainant is dragged to a life of seclusion, unable to bring up her child with permanent metal pipe in her throat.

13. Is it true whether the complainant was in critical condition when she was operated at JIPMER Hospital for emergency tracheotomy?

14. Is it true whether the problem suffered by the complainant was due to her own carelessness, negligence in not taking prescribed medicines and not coming for follow up action?

15. Whether the non-examination of medical expert is fatal to the complainant?

16. Whether O.P.No.5 Govt. Hospital after surgery of the complainant and after obtaining opinion on biopsy sample (Ex.C5) had given any discharge summary to the complainant? If not given, will it not amount to deficiency in service?

45. During the period from 10.03.2003 to 28.07.2003, the complainant was under the care of 2nd opposite party vide Ex.C2 to C6. The estimate level of T4 and TSH of the complainant were not within the normal level which shows an alarming difference in the result.

46. Since the 2nd opposite party had not rendered proper treatment, the complainant was subjected to pain and sufferings, led to the onset of Bilateral Palsy which is a life threatening situation and finally, she had to undergo emergency Tracheotomy surgery at JIPMER in August, 2004.

55. ISSUE No.13:

Dr.Gopalakrishnans deposition revealed that the complainant was in a critical condition when she was operated in JIPMER Hospital for an emergency tracheotomy. The complainant was brought to the hospital for respiratory difficulties associated with noisy breathing. The Doctor further deposed that the surgery was in an emergency situation wherein the patient was with noisy and difficulty in breathing due to paralysis of both sides of vocal cord resulting in near total laryngeal obstruction. Since the surgery was conducted under emergency situation, the Doctor didnt have time to look for the operative status and only examination was done before tracheotomy which reveals Bilateral Vocal cord Abductor Paralysis.