Date of Filing: 04/04/2014
Date of Order: 03/07/2017
ORDER
BY SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, PRESIDENT
1. This is the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Parties (herein referred in short as O.Ps) alleging the Medical Negligence and prays for orders to direct the O.Ps for the following reliefs:-
i) to refund an amount of Rs.23,136/- as expenses incurred by him in the hospital along with 18% interest per annum.
ii) to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation towards the physical strain and mental agony suffered by the complainant and his family members.
iii) Further to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as loss incurred due to loss of pay in his work
iv) to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as money spent for right treatment taken with other doctor also to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that, the complainant is a software engineer and the O.Ps are reputed Multi Specialty Hospital. The complainant states that, in the month of midst of October 2013 while he was working in his office, suddenly collapsed from his seat, twice in an interval of two to three days and later somehow managed to recover. Thereafter the complainant went to the O.Ps hospital for treatment and met one Dr.Murali. M.S. consultant Neurosurgeon, and explained his problems i.e. squatting position, feeling like fall down, giddiness etc. After listening to the complainant without any examination Dr.Murali.M.S. advised the complainant through his prescription to take a tablet called “PREGABALIN” for few days and advised him to reduce his body weight. As per the advice of the said doctor, the complainant took the tablet as advised in the prescription but the complainant did not recover. The complainant continued in facing problems such as problem in getting up from Squatting position, feeling like fall down, giddiness etc, hence after few days the complainant once again went to the O.Ps hospital to meet Dr.Murali. M.S. but he could not meet Dr. Murali.M.S. and was able to met another Consultant Neurosurgeon in the Neurological Department. After enquiry of the complainant about his previous visit, treatment and details about his problems, without any examination, the said doctor advised him in his prescription to take “ELIWEL” tablet, and antidepressant. Thereafter, for few days that the complainant took the medicine as per the advice of the doctor.
3. Further the complainant states that, on 6.11.2013 he was on duty and at his leisure time he was riding bicycle, while riding the bicycle for few minutes, all of a sudden he was fell down from the bicycle and injured his lower lips. Immediately his friends took him to the O.Ps hospital and the duty doctor advised him to admit as an inpatient immediately. Thereafter, the doctor is informed about the previous problems and treatment. Later the doctors from neurology department examined the complainant and CT Brain Spine with C-Spine screening was done as per their instruction and the complainant was an inpatient for two days. Further the health problem of the complainant is diagnosed as TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY and he was given antibiotic, analgesic and antidepressant tablets. The complainant was discharged on 08.11.2013, i.e. after two days with discharge summary mentioning that he was HAEMODYNAMICALLY STABLE AND NO FRESH NEUROLOGICAL DEFICITS and billed for Rs.23,136/-. While discharging the doctors advised the complainant not to worry and everything is normal and he can resume to his work. It is stated that, after two days of discharge from the hospital and the complainant again fell down from the chair at his home and suffered cough, cold and fever quite often. Hence alleged that there was no improvement in his health condition after taking medicines as advised by the doctors as mentioned above. Then the complainant went to a chest specialist since he was suffering from fever cold and cough, who advised him to go to another neurologist known to the doctor. Hence the complainant met another neurologist by name Dr. Pramod M.N. Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore and thoroughly explained his problems and his previous treatment history given in the O.Ps hospital. After examining the complainant in detail and going through with the discharge summary, the said doctor told that, the diagnose and line of treatment given by the O.P hospital were wrong and disagreed with the diagnose made as Traumatic Brain Injury. After examination and diagnose the problem as CEREBELLAR ATAXIA. Hence the other neurologist gave some medicines and advised the complainant not to drive any vehicle and to walk with assistance till he recovers. Thereafter once again the complainant took the second opinion from Dr.Pramod M.N. and it was confirmed the problem suffered by him is CEREBELLAR ATAXIA. The complainant states that after taking proper treatment complainant become stable and after few days he started to go to his office. Hence the complainant alleges that the O.Ps are negligent in giving proper treatment and alleged the deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and hence filed this complaint.
4. Upon issuance of notice O.Ps appeared through their counsel and filed their version. In the version it is contended that on 14.06.2013 the complainant visited the M/s BGS hospital i.e. O.P.No.1 with a complaint of tremors, sweating, palpitations and confusion, suggestive of chronic alcoholism induced depression. The complainant consulted psychiatrist Dr.Vinod Kumar and received treatment for the same and further consulted on 21.6.2013, 28.6.2013 and 12.7.2013. It is contended that on 12.8.2013 complainant consulted Dr Prasad who is a physician for swelling of feet. Thereafter complainant was advised for admission for relevant investigations and he was admitted on 14.8.2013 under the physician and the complainant was treated systematically. Later an opinion of psychiatrist was also taken for depression and advised followed. The complainant also underwent lab tests. Based on the report he was diagnosed having Deranged Thyroid function, Thyroiditis, Endogenous Depression and Vitamin B12 deficiency. The complainant was treated appropriately and was discharged in stable condition on 17.8.2013 with an advise to follow up with reports on OPD basis. Further it is contended that on 18.10.2013 complainant was consulted Dr.Murali Mohan S from the Department of Neurosurgery with complaints of generalized body pain and was symptomatically treated for the same and he came for follow up on 28.10.2013, when he met Dr Chaitanya from Department of neurosurgery. The complainant informed that he had 50% relief of symptoms and his medications were reduced and modified then.
5. Further on 6.11.2013, the complainant visited again with the complaint of falling from a bicycle followed by head injury and was admitted under the Neurosurgery team for monitoring and treatment. The complainant had no history of loss of consciousness, vomiting, seizures or ENT Bleed, The complainant was advised routine blood investigations and CT brain with C-spine screening the reports of which was normal. The history was re-checked with the wife of the complainant, who stated that the complainant had excessive day time somnolence as he had been taking three medications (all of which have sedative property) for cold. In view of his upper respiratory tract infection, Pulmonologist opinion was taken, who advised symptomatic management. Further Psychiatrist opinion was sought, who advised modifications of psychiatric medications. Following the period of monitoring he was discharged on 8.11.2013. Post discharge, he consulted psychiatrist on several occasions.
6. Further the O.Ps admitted that complainant visited their hospital and after examination they prescribed medicines by taking into consideration of background history of patient and asked the patient to reduce the body weight. Further the O.Ps denied all other allegations made in the complaint and also contended that it is not in their knowledge that another neurologist Dr.Pramod M.N and Dr.Sujith diagnosed the disease of complainant as Cerebral Ataxia and is a Symptom of alcoholism. Hence, O.Ps contended that there is no deficiency in service on their part and ultimately prays for dismissal of the complaint as not pressed.
7. In order to substantiate the case of the parties and both parties filed their affidavit evidence and also heard the arguments.
8. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following points will arise for our consideration are:-
(A) Whether the complainant has proved
Medical negligence on the part of the O.Ps and which leads to deficiency in their service?
(B) Whether the complainant is entitled to
the relief prayed for in the complaint?
(C) What order?
9. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT (A) & ( B): In the Negative
POINT (C): As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
POINT No. (A) & (B):-
10. On perusal of the pleading of the parties and the evidence placed on record, it is an undisputed fact that, the complainant had visited the O.Ps hospital with the health problems. It is worth to note that, the complainant states that, in midst of October 2013 while he was working in the office all of a sudden he fell down and he was taken to the O.Ps hospital. The ailments narrated in the complaint by the complainant is somewhat different than the O.Ps narrated in the version and on close scrutiny of both the parties pleadings and the evidence placed on record, it reveals that all the ailments narrated by the complainant is also not denied by the O.Ps but the complainant suppressed some of the facts of tremors, sweating, palpitations and confusion, suggestive of chronic alcoholism induced depression. Further the complainant also not denied about his consultation with the psychiatrist Dr.Vinod Kumar and received treatment for the same and further consulted on 21.6.2013, 28.6.2013 and 12.7.2013 and also consulted Dr Prasad who is a physician for swelling of feet. Hence these entire facts complainant did not disclose in his complaint nor in the evidence and also not denied the same.
11. On over all perusal of the case of the complainant, the sole allegation of the complainant is that, inspite of taking due treatment at the O.P’s hospital but the complainant’s ailments were persisting and causing a recurring effect. Hence the complainant approached the another neurologist who opined that the complainant was suffering from Cerebellar Ataxia and same was also confirmed by the second opinion took by the complainant from the Dr.Sujith Kumar and opined that the diagnosis made by the O.Ps doctor is wrong and the line of treatment given to the complainant is also wrong.
12. It is pertinent to note that, the medical field is advanced as high as the sky as deep as the ocean. Hence there are many kinds of line of treatments available in the different hospitals. Therefore the doctors who treated initially the complainant as per the history collected from the patient complainant and the doctors who are having the right to take proper decision to treat the patient and to decide the line of treatment. It is worth to note that the various decisions of the Hon’ble National Commission and Hon’ble Apex Court time and again it is held that we cannot question the line of treatment decided by the doctor and it may differ from doctor to doctor. Hence the line of treatment, it may be the wrong and same cannot be attributed as deficiency in service. Furthermore, as per the saying of the complainant the doctor who cured his disease opined that the O.Ps doctors wrongly diagnosed and the line of treatment is wrong. However the complainant pleaded about the second opinion of the doctor saying that the diagnosis done by the O.Ps doctor is wrong but the complainant failed to examine the said doctor. Hence mere pleadings are not enough, the law is well settled that is plead and prove. Moreover complainant did not examine any expert on his behalf. It is the burden on the complainant who alleges medical negligence or deficiency in service he has to prove his case by providing cogent evidence. On perusing the overall evidence placed on record we are of the considered opinion that the complainant failed to prove that the O.Ps doctor committed medical negligence and it amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence the complainant is not entitled for relief as sought in the complaint. Accordingly we answered the point (A) and (B) in the negative.
POINT No. (C):-
13. On the basis of the answering the Point No. (A) and (B) and in the result, we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
1. The complaint hereby is dismissed. No order as to cost.
2. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 3rd Day of July 2017)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
