Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

DATED : 06/JUNE/2018 PER :- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.S. SHARMA, PRESIDENT.

This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.12.2017, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bilaspur(C.G.) (henceforth "District Forum") in Complaint Case No.CC/61/2015. By the impugned order, learned District Forum, has dismissed the complaint of the complainant.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the complaint of the complainant are that the complainant was having problem in his left eye, therefore, on 10.03.2014 he // 2 // went to the clinic of the O.P. No.1 for test of his left eye, where the O.P. No.1 examined his left eye and informed that he is having cataract in left eye. The O.P. No.1 advised the complainant to undergo operation of the cataract. The O.P. No.1 also assured the complainant that after operation, the left eye of the complainant will become completely alright. On the advice of the O.P. No.1, the complainant decided to undergo the operation and on the advice of the O.P. No.1, prior to operation preliminary medical check up i.e. blood test, urine test, blood pressure test was conducted on 10.03.2014 from Dr. Paritosh Sharma. The complainant shown the preliminary test report given by Dr. Paritosh Sharma to the O.P. No.1.The O.P. No.1 perused the test report of the complainant and conducted the cataract operation of left eye of the complainant on 14.03.2014 at Ashirwad Laser and Phaco Eye Hospital, Bilaspur. On 14.03.2014, after operation, the O.P. No.1 discharged the complainant from the Hospital on the ground that the condition of the eye is alright. The cataract operation of left eye of the complainant conducted by the O.P. No.1 was completely unsuccessful and the complainant became blind by left eye. After conducting operation of the left eye of the complainant by the O.P. No.1 from 14.03.2014 the complainant was having unbearable pain. The complainant was pouring the eye drop in his left eye and was taking medicines, as instructed by the O.P. No.1 even then there was unbearable pain in his left eye. The complainant was examining his eye from time to time. The complainant was continuously requesting the O.P. No.1 to examine the left eye and for treatment of the pain, but the O.P. No.1 told that he would be alright and treated the complainant till 5.11.2014, but the complainant could not get any benefit from his treatment. Following the instruction of the O.P. No.1, the complainant was bearing unbearable pain for 9 // 3 // month. The O.P. No.1 took a sum of Rs.30,000/- in cash for treatment from the complainant on 14.03.2014 out of which Rs.15,000/- was for lance and Rs.15,000/- for other expenses. After operation, on the instruction of the O.P. No.1 the complainant was continuously going for examining his eye to O.P. No.1 but after operation the complainant could not get any relief. There was unbearable pain in the left eye. He was unable to see anything from left eye. The O.P. No.1 negligently treated the left eye of the complainant. After conducting operation of the eye of the complainant, the O.P. No.1 discharged the complainant and treated him negligently. The O.P. No.1 had continuously for 9 months from 14.03.2014 to 05.11.2014 treated the left eye of the complainant. On the instruction of the O.P. No.1, the complainant was regularly taking treatment. After operation of the left eye of the complainant, there was unbearable pain his left eye. Due to negligent treatment given by the O.P. No.1 to the complainant, the complainant was bearing unbearable pain for 9 months. The O.P. No.1 advised the complainant to use power spectacle and the O.P. No.1 was misleading the complainant in the name of treatment. On the advice of the O.P. No.1, the complainant also used power spectacle in his left eye, but he could not get any relief.

3. The O.P. No.1 filed his written statement and averred that the instant complaint has been filed by the complainant on the basis of alleged negligence committed by the O.P. No.1. The O.P. No.1 is insured with United India // 5 // Insurance Company Limited under Profession Indemnity Policy No.230200/46/14/35/00000528, which was effective for the period from 09.05.2013 to 08.05.2016. During the above period, the operation of the complainant was conducted by the O.P. No.1. As the O.P. No.1 is insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd., therefore, the United India Insurance Company Ltd. is a necessary party in the complaint. As the complainant has not made United India Insurance Co. Ltd. as a party, therefore due to non- joinder of the necessary party, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The complainant came to hospital of the O.P. No.1 on 10.03.2014 for examination of his left eye, O.P. No.1 examined left eye of the complainant and informed that he was having cataract in his left eye. The complainant was advised for operation of cataract and he was also advised for blood sugar test/ urine test/ blood pressure test and ECG test. On 10.03.2014 the complainant was examined by Dr. Paritosh Sharma (Physician and Chest Specialist), who informed in the his test report that the complainant is having high blood pressure (170/100). In the above test report, it is also mentioned that the complainant Narottam Rao was not taking any medicine for high blood pressure, therefore, Dr. Paritosh Sharma prescribed medicines in his report. On 14.03.2014 again the complainant went to Dr. Paritosh Sharma for check up and on above date his check up was done and his blood pressure was found 130/80, which comes in the category of normal blood pressure. On above date the complainant appeared before the O.P. No.1 for operation. Besides the report of Dr. Paritosh Sharma, there was another report, which was in respect of sugar and the same was shown to the O.P. No.1. The above report was issued by Shivam Pathology Collection Lab, Ganiyari, Bilaspur. It is pertinent to // 6 // mention that in the above report, the date of report was not mentioned, but the complainant informed the O.P. No.1 that after immediate examination, the report was obtained on 14.03.2014 itself. In the report of Shivam Pathology Collection Lab Ganiyari, the blood sugar of the complainant was mentioned (Fasting 110 and P.P.120) which was normal. On 14.03.2014 after perusing the report of Dr. Paritosh Sharma and Shivam Pathology, the O.P. No.1 found that the blood pressure and sugar of the complainant was normal, therefore, the O.P. No.1 conducted the cataract operation of left eye of the complainant. On the above date, besides complainant, the O.P. No.1 also conducted cataract operation of other patients. The cataract operation of left eye of the complainant, which was conducted by the O.P. No.1 on 14.03.2014 was completely successful and after operation, the complainant was discharged on that day itself. On 15.03.2014 i.e. next day, the complainant again came to O.P. No.1 for follow check up, where his bandage was opened and he was provided necessary medicines. On the above date, the vision of the complainant was absolutely alright and was not having pain or any problem. The complainant came to the O.P. No.1 from time to time in the fixed intervals for follow checkup and his left eye was examined, his left eye was absolutely alright and there was no problem in it. In document at Page No.10 which was attached along with complaint, it is mentioned that on 05.04.2014, in the examination done by the O.P. No.1, in the left eye of the complainant, of which operation was done, the vision power was 6/12 with spectacle which comes in category of good vision. The above category of the vision makes clear that the complainant was having good vision. The O.P. No.1 had taken the fees in respect of the operation which was fixed and the amount which was taken towards expenses regarding // 7 // operation was voluntarily deposited by the complainant. In the discharge ticket (page No.11) filed by the complainant, it is mentioned that on 16.05.2014 after examination of his eye it was found that his vision was 6/12 (with spectacle), which comes in category of normal and good vision. From it, it is clear that after conducting operation on 14.03.2014, on 05.04.2014 which is date of first follow up and 16.05.2014, the complainant was not having any problem and he was seeing everything clearly from his left eye and his vision power was 6/12 with spectacle. The complainant has not filed any document, which shows that after 16.05.2014 till 05.11.2014, the complainant appeared before the O.P. No.1 in respect of any problem in his left eye. After 16.05.2014, the complainant never came in the hospital of O.P. No.1 and did not take consultation. After 6 months i.e. on 05.11.2014, the complainant came in the hospital of O.P. No.1 and after examination, the O.P. No.1 found that there is swelling in the left eye of the complainant. On being asked by the O.P. No.1, the complainant informed that he is having high blood pressure, but the complainant did not inform the O.P. No.1 that he is also having problem of blood sugar. Looking to the retina of the complainant, the O.P. No.1 prescribed necessary medicine and advised him to come for follow up, but after 05.11.2014, the complainant never came to O.P. No.1. The complainant did not follow the instruction of the O.P. No.1 and after 05.11.2014, he did not come to O.P. No.1 for follow up checkup. On 22.11.2014, the complainant went to another eye specialist Dr. Sandeep Tiwari for treatment of his left eye. At that time Dr. Sandeep Tiwari found that swelling was increased in the eye of the complainant and it was converted into blister (ulcer). Dr. Sandeep Tiwari, advised the complainant for his sugar test. Thereafter on 24.11.2014 blood sugar test of the complainant was done in // 8 // Reliable Patholab, Magarpara, Bilaspur where it was found that his blood sugar was very high i.e. fasting 150 and random 181. The complainant had suffered from Diabetes but he was not aware that due to uncontrolled diabetes, there was swelling / ulcer in the left eye of the complainant and his eye was damaged. The left eye of the complainant was not damaged due to the operation conducted by the O.P. No.1 The complainant did not file the blood sugar test report of Reliable Patholab, Magarpara, Bilaspur dated 24.11.2014 before the District Forum, in which it was found that the blood sugar of the complainant was very high). The O.P. No.1 had properly and successfully conducted the cataract operation of the left eye of the complainant. Whatever problem occurred in the left eye of the complainant due to negligence of the complainant and due to uncontrolled sugar. There is no direct or indirect relation between the swelling in left eye or ulcer with the operation conducted by the O.P. No.1 on 14.03.2014. The complainant was very well knowing that the main and cause of damage of his eye was uncontrolled sugar, even then the complainant has filed false complaint on baseless ground, which is liable to be dismissed. When the complainant came to O.P. No.1 on 05.04.2014 and 16.05.2014 for follow up, then his vision power was 6/12, which is termed as normal vision. If there is any mistake or infection in the operation of the eye, then within 6 weeks of the operation, there is problem to the patient and his vision power become weak. From date of operation i.e. 14.03.2014 to 16.05.2014 i.e. follow up date, the vision power of the complainant was fully good and normal, from which it is clear that the operation of the complainant was successful. Whatever problem caused to the complainant after 7 months of operation, in the month of November, 2014 was due to his uncontrolled sugar // 9 // and the O.P. No.1 has no concern with it. On 05.11.2014 only once the complainant came to O.P. No.1 and thereafter he did not come to O.P. No.1 for follow up. The complainant went to another doctor, Dr. Sandeep Tiwari, who looking to the high blood sugar of the complainant, referred the complainant to Raipur Medical College. There is no relationship between the damage to the eye of the complainant and the operation conducted by the O.P. No.1. The complainant is not entitled to get any compensation from the O.P. No.1. The complainant has deliberately suppressed the very important document in which the fact regarding uncontrolled sugar, the complainant is having, is mentioned. The O.P. No.1 did not commit any negligence or deficiency in service. The complaint is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost. The complainant had taken treatment on 22.11.2014 from Eye Specialist Dr. Sandeep Tiwari. Dr. Sandeep Tiwari himself deposed in his affidavit that operation of the complainant was conducted on 14.03.2014 by the O.P. No.1 and during examination he found that the retina of the complainant was having ulcer and infection. The operation of the complainant was conducted prior to 7 months of so called infection. It appears that the infection was caused to the complainant due to diabetes and not due to operation. According to the O.P. No.1 there is chance of infection due to operation within 1 to 6 weeks. As after two months of the operation, the complainant was got examining his eye and on 16.05.2014 his vision power was good, it shows that his operation was successful and infection was not caused due to operation, but it was occurred due to diabetes. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.

// 10 //

4. The O.P. No.2 filed its written statement and averred that the complainant has not filed any medical investigation report of any expert doctor from which it is proved that the cataract operation of the left eye of the complainant was unsuccessful and the complainant become blind by his left eye. The complainant has filed false complaint to unnecessarily recover the amount. Dr. L.C. Madharia, is a senior and reputed eye specialist and he was providing his services since 30 years in the Bilaspur city. On 10.03.2014, the complainant came to O.P. No.1 for treatment of his left eye, then he was informed that he was having cataract. In the medical check-up, advice for blood sugar test was given. On examination Dr. Paritosh Sharma found blood sugar 170/100 When the blood pressure and sugar of the complainant become normal, then on 14.03.2014 his cataract operation was done which was successful. On next day of operation i.e. 15.03.30214, the complainant came to O.P. No.1, then his bandage was opened. The vision power of the complaint was correct and he was not having pain or problem. The complainant against came to O.P. No.1 for check up on 05.04.2014 and 16.05.2014. On 16.05.2014 when his check up was done, his vision power was 6/12 with number of spectacle. It is normal vision power and comes in the category of good vision power. Till 2 months of operation, the vision power of the complainant was good it means the operation was successful. After seven months of the operation i.e. on 05.11.2014, the complainant again came to O.P. No.1 at that time there was swelling in his eye on asking regarding blood pressure he informed that his blood pressure is normal. The O.P. No.1 prescribed medicines and advised the complainant for regular test, but thereafter the complainant did not ever come to the O.P. No.1 for test. On 22.11.2014, the // 11 // complainant went to another eye hospital, Dr. Sandeep Tiwari for treatment of his left eye at that time the swelling was increased and converted into blister (ulcer). Dr. Sandeep Tiwari advised the complainant for blood pressure test. The complainant got conducted his blood sugar test on 24.11.2014 in Reliable Patholab, Magarpara, Raipur, where it was found that his blood sugar is very high. Fasting 150 mg and Random 181 mg, it means the complainant had suffered diabetes, but he was not aware. Due to diabetes ulcer was found in the eye. The complainant had suppressed the above facts in his complaint. The proper and successful operation of the cataract of left eye of the complainant was done by Dr. Madharia on 14.03.2014. Whatever problem caused in the left eye of the complainant after 7 month of the operation is due to negligence of the complainant himself and due to uncontrolled diabetes. It has no concern with the operation. The complainant was very well knowing that the main cause of damage to his eye is uncontrolled diabetes and he suppressed the same and did not filed blood report before the District Forum. The complainant has not filed the instant complaint with his clean hand and filed the same by suppressing his diseased. The complainant is not entitled to get any compensation from O.P. No.2. In absence of the insurance policy it is not acceptable that the O.P. No.1 Dr. L.C. Madharia, is insured with O.P. No.1 under Professional Indemnity Policy for the period from 17.07.2014 to 16.07.2015. The complainant has not filed any Certificate of any other Expert Doctor to the effect that he became blind by his left eye and he demanded the amount exaggeratedly and suppressed the important documents. The operation of the complainant was successful and the problem to the complainant after 6-7 months was caused due to sugar. The complainant has suppressed the above important fact. The // 12 // complainant is not entitled to get any compensation. The O.P. No.2 did not commit any deficiency in service. The complaint is liable to be dismissed against O.P. No.2.

// 17 //

11. Shri M.L. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 (O.P. No.2) has argued that the complainant has not filed any medical investigation report of any expert doctor from which it is proved that the cataract operation of the left eye of the complainant was unsuccessful and the complainant become blind by his left eye. The complainant has filed false complaint to unnecessarily recover the amount. Dr. L.C. Madharia, is a senior and reputed eye specialist and he was providing his services since 30 years in the Bilaspur city. On 10.03.2014, the complainant came to O.P. No.1 for treatment of his left eye, then he was informed that he was having cataract. In the medical check-up, advice for blood sugar test was given. On examination Dr. Paritosh Sharma found blood sugar 170/100. When the blood pressure and sugar of the complainant become normal, then on 14.03.2014 his cataract operation was done which was successful. On next day of operation i.e. 15.03.30214, the complainant came to O.P. No.1, then his bandage was opened. The vision power of the complaint was correct and he was not having pain or problem. The complainant against came to O.P. No.1 for check up on 05.04.2014 and 16.05.2014. On 16.05.2014 when his check up was done, his vision power was 6/12 with number of spectacle. It is normal vision power and comes in the category of good vision power. Till 2 months of operation, the vision power of the complainant was good it means the operation was successful. After seven months of the operation i.e. on 05.11.2014, the complainant again came to O.P. No.1 at that time there was swelling in his eye on asking regarding blood pressure he informed that his blood pressure is normal. The O.P. No.1 prescribed medicines and advised the complainant for regular test, but thereafter the complainant did not ever come to the O.P. No.1 for test. On // 18 // 22.11.2014, the complainant went to another eye hospital, Dr. Sandeep Tiwari for treatment of his left eye at that time the swelling was increased and converted into blister (ulcer). Dr. Sandeep Tiwari advised the complainant for blood pressure test. The complainant got conducted his blood sugar test on 24.11.2014 in Reliable Patholab, Magarpara, Raipur, where it was found that his blood sugar is very high. Fasting 150 mg and Random 181 mg, it means the complainant had suffered diabetes, but he was not aware. Due to diabetes ulcer was found in the eye. The complainant had suppressed the above facts in his complaint. The proper and successful operation of the cataract of left eye of the complainant was done by Dr. Madharia on 14.03.2014. Whatever problem caused in the left eye of the complainant after 7 month of the operation is due to negligence of the complainant himself and due to uncontrolled diabetes. It has no concern with the operation. The complainant was very well knowing that the main cause of damage to his eye is uncontrolled diabetes and he suppressed the same and did not filed blood report before the District Forum. The complainant has not filed the instant complaint with his clean hand and filed the same by suppressing his diseased. The complainant is not entitled to get any compensation from O.P. No.2. In absence of the insurance policy it is not acceptable that the O.P. No.1 Dr. L.C. Madharia, is insured with O.P. No.1 under Professional Indemnity Policy for the period from 17.07.2014 to 16.07.2015. The complainant has not filed any Certificate of any other Expert Doctor to the effect that he became blind by his left eye and he demanded the amount exaggeratedly and suppressed the important documents. The operation of the complainant was successful and the problem to the complainant after 6-7 months was caused due to sugar. The complainant has // 19 // suppressed the above important fact. The complainant is not entitled to get any compensation. The O.P. No.2 did not commit any deficiency in service . The impugned order passed by the District Forum is just and proper. The appeal is liable to be dismissed.