Complaint filed on: 01-06-2021
Disposed on: 31-10-2022
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU
CC.No.46/2021
DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022
PRESENT
SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, B.Com., LLM., PRESIDENT
SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc. (Agri), LLB., MBA., MEMBER
SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., LLB. (Spl)., LADY MEMBER
Smt.Neelamma, A/a 65 years, W/o Jayaramaiah,
R/o Vasudevarahalli, Honnavalli Hobli, Tiptur.
……….Complainant
(By Sri. N.Basavaraj, Advocate )
V/s
1. BGS Global Hospital,
Uttarahalli Main Riad, Kengeri,
Bengaluru-560 060.
2. Dr.Rahul, Consultant at THS
Hospital, Tumakuru, BGS Hospital
Uttarahalli Main Road, Kengeri,
Bengaluru-560 060.
3. Dr.Shekar, Shekar Hospital,
Near Hassan Circle, Opp. Indian
Oil Petrol Bunk, NH-206 (Old B.H.Road),
Tiptur-572 201.
(OP No.1 By Sri.S.V.Joga Rao, Adv.,)
(OP No.3 By Sri.C.S.Kumaraswamy, Adv.,)
:ORDER:
BY SRI. KUMARA.N., MEMBER
This complaint was filed by the complainant U/s 12 of C.P. Act to direct the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- which was paid by the complainant to OPs for wrong diagnose and treatment and Rs.5,00,000/- towards mental agony and other costs.
- The Opposite Parties were BGS Global Hospital, Uttarahalli Main Road, Kengeri, Bengaluru, Dr.Rahul, Consultant at THS Hospital, Tumakuru, & BGS Hospital, Uttarahalli Main Road, Kengeri, Bengaluru and Dr.Shekar, Shekar Hospital, Near Hassan Circle, Tiptur (hereinafter called as OP Nos. 1 to 3 respectively)
- It was the case of the complainant that on 04.02.2020, the complainant approached the OP No.3 for treatment of pain in her right foot, accordingly, the OP No.3 treated the complainant by prescribing some tablets, the pain not reduced. After few days, puss formed in the right finger of right leg and the complainant approached the OP No.3 for further treatment, accordingly, the OP No.3 did dressing and removed the puss and advised the complainant to getting done the dressing day by day. In spite of it, the complainant not recovered. After five days, the complainant again approached the OP No.3for treatment, at that time; the OP No.3 gave the reference of OP No.2 who was consulting Specialist Doctor visiting THS Hospita, Tumkur and also working in OP No.1 hospital. The complainant on 12.02.2020 approached the OP No.2 for treatment and at that time, the OP No.2 collected Rs.500/- from the complainant as fees at THS hospital, Tumkur and OP No.2 diagnosed and advised the complainant to undergo Angioplasty stunting immediately and advised the complainant to take treatment at OP No.1 and informed the complainant that cost of the treatment will be around Rs.1,00,000/-. Further, the complainant submitted that as per the OP No.2 advise and suggestion, the complainant on 13.02.2020 approached the OP No.1and 2 for treatment and got admitted in OP No.1 hospital and at that time the complainant paid Rs.50,000/- as advance, on 14.02.2020, the OP No.2 performed the Angioplasty stunting to the complainant and the complainant’s Daughter paid Rs.15,000/- and Rs.35,000/- to the OP No.1 on 14.02.2020.
- The complainant further submitted that on 16.02.2020, the OP No.1 discharged the complainant and advised the complainant to pay balance amount of Rs 93885/- since the bill amount was Rs.1,93,885/- and finally after the bargaining, the complainant has paid another Rs.70,000/- to the OP No.1. After two days of discharge, the complainant suffered severe pain in the right foot and contacted the OP No.2 over phone, in turn, the OP No.2 suggested and prescribed some tablets, in spite of it, pain not reduced and OP No.2 suggested the complainant to come to Bangalore/OP No.1 Hospital for check-up. Accordingly, on 25.02.2020, the complainant went to Bangalore and approached the OP No.1 & contacted OP No2. After the check-up, the complainant informed that Gangrene has spread to heart of the complainant and no chances of the complainant to survive and refused to treat further. The complainant without any alternative, returned to her home place and approached the OP No.3 for treatment, but OP No.3 shouted and not allowed the complainant to enter the hospital. Finally without any choice as a final, the complainant approached the Dr.Kumar Hospital, Tiptur and in turn he suggested the complainant to take treatment at Bagwan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bengaluru. Accordingly, on 29.02.2020, the complainant approached the said hospital and taken treatment and the complainant’s thigh and leg was amputated and the complainant has spent nearly more than Rs.1,50,000/- for the treatment. The complainant further submitted that due to wrong diagnose and treatment by the OP No.2, the complainant lost right leg and suffered lot, for that the complainant issued legal notice to OP Nos. 1 to 3 on 18.01.2021 and OPs denied and replied, hence this complaint.
- After registering the complaint, notice were served on OPs. Sri. S.V.J. Advocate filed Vakalath for OP Nos. 1 & 2 and Sri.G.S.K., Advocate filed power for OP No.3. The OP Nos. 1 & 2 and 3 have filed their separate version.
- The OP Nos. 1 & 2 in their version admitted the fact that the complainant on 12.02.2020, along with Doppler report dated: 04.02.2020 approached the OP No 2 at THS Hospital, accordingly OP No 2 examined the complainant and the complainant Doppler report dated: 04.02.2020 and diagnosed the complainant suffered with critical limb Ischemia and noticed that, Femoral pulse felt, popliteal and Distal Pulses absent, Infected ulcer present on the tip of the toe, severe rest pain and the complainant unable to walk. After the examination, the OP No.2 advised the complainant to take further treatment at OP No1/hospital. The complainant on 13-02-2020 admitted at OP No 1 hospital and the complainant treated by the OP No 2, by consulting the cardiologist and specialists, accordingly on 14-02-2020 the angioplasty Stunting done successfully to the complainant and the complainant paid the prescribed charges and the complainant discharged on 16.02.2020 with following findings:
- Patient was stable and was ambulating without pain in the leg.
- Right lower limb was warm up to the ankle,
- No discoloration of foot was seen.
The complainant was in good condition and denied other averments made by the complainant in the complaint and hence prays to dismiss the complaint against them.
5. The OP No.3 admitted the fact that the complainant approached the OP No.3 on 04.02.2020, due to the complainant’s right foot leg pain, accordingly, the OP No.3 examined the complainant and prescribed some tables and further the OP No.3 contended that the complainant has filed a complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act and denied other averments of the complainant and prayed to dismiss the complaint.
6. The complainant and OP Nos. 1 to 3 have filed their affidavit evidence. The counsel for the complainant filed 25 documents which were marked as Ex.P1 to P25 and OP Nos. 1 & 2 counsel filed 35 documents, which were marked as Ex.R1 to R35 and the counsel for OP No.3 filed 02 documents which were marked as Ex.R1 & R2.
7. In spite of sufficient opportunities, the complainant and op’s counsel did not advanced oral arguments. Hence, their oral argument taken as heard.
8. The points that would arise for our determination are as here under:
1) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service/unfair contract of OPs?
2) Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought for?
9. Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:
Point No.1: in the Negative
Point No.2: As per the final order
:REASONS:
Point No.1 to 2:
10. The counsel for the complainant produced Ex.P1/prescription/OPD slips of OP No.3 dated:04.02.2020, Ex.P2 and P3 were OPD slips of THS Hospital, Tumkur, Ex.P4, the bill of THS Hospital, Tumakuru, where in the complainant paid Rs.500/-. Ex.P5 to P16, OPD/test reports of the complainant in OP No.1 hospital. Ex.P17, the Legal notice of the complainant dated:18.01.2021. Ex.P18 to Ex.P23, the postal receipts/acknowledges. Ex.P24, the reply notice of OPs to the complainant. Ex.P25, the photo of the complainant, where in the complainant’s right leg was removed.
11. The counsel for the OP Nos. 1 & 2 produced 35 documents, Ex.R1 to R17, the admission/consent letter of the complainant and other reports of OP No.1 hospital. Ex.R18, the Doppler report, dated: 04.02.2020, Ex.R19 to R35, tests/ treatment and other reports of the complainant of OP No.1 hospital.
12. The counsel for the OP No.3 also produced 02 documents. Ex.R1, the OPD slip of complainant dated: 04.02.2020 and Ex.R2, copy of Doppler report of the complainant.
13. Gangrene is a type of tissue death caused by a lack of blood supply. Symptoms may include a change in skin color to red or black, numbness, swelling, pain, skin breakdown, and coolness. The feet and hands are most commonly affected. If the gangrene is caused by an infectious agent, it may present with a fever or sepsis. Treatment may involve surgery to remove the dead tissue, antibiotics to treat any infection, and efforts to address the underlying cause. Surgical efforts may include debridement, amputation, or the use of maggot therapy. Efforts to treat the underlying cause may include bypass surgery or angioplasty. In certain cases, hyperbaric oxygen therapy may be useful.
14. Angioplasty is surgical repair or unblocking of a blood vessel, especially a coronary artery. Angioplasty is also known as balloon angioplasty and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), is a minimally invasive endovascular procedure used to widen narrowed or obstructed arteries or veins, typically to treat arterial atherosclerosis. A deflated balloon attached to a catheter (a balloon catheter) is passed over a guide-wire into the narrowed vessel and then inflated to a fixed size. The balloon forces expansion of the blood vessel and the surrounding muscular wall, allowing an improved blood flow. A stent may be inserted at the time of ballooning to ensure the vessel remains open, and the balloon is then deflated and withdrawn. Angioplasty has come to include all manner of vascular interventions that are typically performed percutaneously.
15. In the above discussions, OPs, as per the Doppler report produced by the complainant and upon examined the complainant, diagnosed & opted to treat the complainant by prescribing antibiotics and angioplasty, accordingly treated the complainant.
16.On perusal of the complaint, versions / objections of OPs, affidavit evidences, documents filed by the complainant and OPs, the Doppler report of OP No.3 i.e. R2 and Ex.R18 of OP Nos. 1 & 2, wherein referred Doctors was not either OP No.3 or OP No.2 and the referred Doctor was Dr Ramesh Babu. The complainant alleged that, after the said treatment by the OP No 2 & 1, the complainant discharged on 16-02-2020 and after few days, the complainant suffered pain and contacted the OP No 2 over phone and in turn OP No 2 prescribed some tablets via what sup, in spite of it pain not reduced, further, the OP No 2 suggested the complainant to come over to Bangalore / OP No 1, accordingly the complainant on 25.02.2020 approached the OP No 2, and upon testing the complainant ,the OP No 2 informed that the complainant gangrene spread up to heart and the complainant has no hope to survive and refused to treat the complainant and the complainant went back to her native and approached the OP No 3 for further treatment, but the OP No 3 shouted and refused to treat the complainant, to prove this the complainant not produced any documents like OPD slips / bill paid and other test reports on that particular dates, where as the OPs denied the same. The complainant further alleged that, the wrong diagnose and wrong treatment by the OP Nos. 2 & 3, made the complainant to suffer and lost her right leg, to prove that, the complainant has not produced any believable evidence and further the complainant in her complaint stated that the complainant finally has taken treatment on 29.02.2020 at Bhagawan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bangalore and spent more than Rs.1,50,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant recovered. But the complainant has not produced any documents regarding treatment given / diagnosis / test reports of the complainant by the Bhagawan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bangalore and also the said hospital not impleded as necessary party to the case, Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:-
:O R DER:
The complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed.No costs.
Furnish the copy of order to the complainant and opposite parties at free of cost.
