Date of Filing: 06-01-2017

Date of Order:  14 -11-2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD

                                                              P r e s e n t­                                                                                     

   HON’BLE  Sri  P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B., PRESIDENT

HON’BLE Sri  K.RAM MOHAN, B.Sc. M.A L.L.B.,   MEMBER

HON’BLE SMT. CH. LAKSHMI PRASANNA, B.Sc. LLM.,(PGD (ADR)  MEMBER

    ON THIS THE THURSDAY   THE 14^th    DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019

C.C.No.40 /2017

Between

Myana Narayana

W/o Buchi Ramulu, age 72 years,

R/o.H.No.9-6-104/1, Ramnagar,

Karimnagar.

……Complainants

And            

L.V.Prasad Eye Institute,

Kallam Anji Reddy Campus, LV Prasad Marg,

Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 034.

….Opposite Party

Counsel for the complainants    :  Mr.P.Sridhar

Counsel for the opposite Party   :  Mahmood & Co. Advocates

O R D E R

(By.  Smt. CH. Lakshmi Prasanna,B.Sc. LLM., Member on behalf of bench)

1.                       The complaint has been preferred under Sec.12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Party for deficiency of service and negligence in post-operative care of two cataract surgeries causing fracture of D/3 of Left Femur having fallen down from the wheel chair and consequential orthopedic surgery ORIF with locking plate and physiotherapy treatment. Hence, seeking appropriate directions to the opposite party to pay Rs.1,48,631/- towards the expenditure incurred by the complainant for the surgical treatment of fracture in Sunshine Hospitals with interest @18%PA and to award a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing mental agony to the complainant and award an amount of Rs.5000/- towards costs of litigation.
2. The brief averments of the complainant are that;

                                He is 72 years old and underwent cataract operations for his left eye on 5/11/2014 and his right eye on 14/7/2015 in the hospital of the Opposite party. On one of his regular follow-up visits i.e. on appointed date 30/12/2015, he was advised to undergo OCT ( Optic Coherence Tomography), when he reportedly fell down from the wheel chair/stool and sustained injuries to his left thigh. He was immediately referred by his attending doctor vide Letter dt.30/12/2015to an Orthopedic Surgeon in NIMS Hospital Punjautta for expert opinion and treatment. The complainant chose to consult Sunshine Hospitals and got operated for the fractured thigh (D/3 of Left Femur) and discharged on 1/1/2016. Apparently, the complainant spent Rs.1,48,631/- for the Orthopedic treatment in Sunshine Hospitals. The present petition is filed in pursuance of the Legal notice dt. 7/5/2016 served on the Opposite party calling on them to pay for the medical expenses incurred for the orthopedic treatment ensued due to negligent handling during the follow-up visit for post-operative investigation tests and compensation for mental agony and costs of litigation.

3.                        The Opposite Party in the written version submitted that the Complaint is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed for the following reasons

1. The opposite party was diligent from the first-time when the complainant approached them complaining of gradual diminution of vision and successfully performed both the cataract operations for his left eye on 5/11/2014 and his right eye on 14/7/2015, following the standard procedures and the complainant never had any post-operative problem in his vision thereafter.
2. During one of his follow-up visits, when he was taken for investigation/check-up OCT ( Optic Coherence Tomography),the complainant fell down off the stool, causing injury to his left thigh and immediately referred to the Orthopedic Surgeon in NIMS for treatment. However, the complainant chose to go to Sunshine Hospitals, Secunderabad and got operated for the fractured thigh (D/3 of Left Femur) and discharged on 1/1/2016.
3. It is the contention of the Opposite Party that there is no cause of action against them as the complainant had no problem whatsoever after the cataract operations conducted by them and he regained perfect vision.  The contention of the Opposite Party is that the fracture mishap that occurred during one of the complainant’s follow-up post operation investigation tests was due to the complainant’s carelessness, sloppiness and negligence when he slipped/fell down the stool and hence cannot be attributed to the Opposite party as they have been diligent enough through out the treatment and took standard care of the patient providing all care and support for his safety .
4. That the Opposite Party has been providing efficient/best eye care ophthalmological health services to over 15 million people belonging to all sections of the society since 1987 with competent doctors and trained professionals under the aegis of World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Prevention of Blindness and a Global Resource Centre for Vision 2010 ( Right to Sight Initiative).

4)                        In the enquiry, the complainant filed his evidence affidavit reiterating the averments in the complaint supporting his claim with 14 documents of the  case history including the medical bills of both the Cataract Operations by the Opposite party and the Orthopedic treatment by Sunshine Hospital.

For the Opposite party, Evidence Affidavit of the Doctor-Incharge of Patient Care Services was filed along with entire medical records of the complainant including the discharge summary.

5.                             Based on the facts and material brought on record, and written arguments submitted by both the parties, the following points have emerged or consideration:

1. Whether the complainant could make out the case of deficiency and negligence of service on the part of the Opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim/compensation made in the complaint?
3. To what relief?

6. Point No.1:- The grievance of the complainant is that he suffered a fracture in his left thigh due to the negligence of the Opposite Party during his follow-up visit to the O.P’s Hospital after his cataract operation and hence seeking compensation for the pain and suffering and medical expenses incurred for the resultant damage and the ensuing orthopedic treatment. As per the Discharge Summary of the Sunshine Hospitals Exhibit No.A1, the complainant got admitted on 30/12/2015 and underwent a surgery ORIF with locking plate for fracture D/3 of left femur on 31/12/2015. Exhibit A8 dt. 30/12/2015 shows the bill receipt for the post-operative investigation in the O.P’s Hospital and Exhibit No.A11 dt.30/12/2015 reference letter by the Doctor-Incharge to Orthopedic Surgeon of NIMS Hospital.  Thus, it is undisputed that the complaint sustained an injury when he fell down the stool during the check-up examination in the O.P’s Hospital on 30/12/2015 and got operated for the resultant fracture immediately on 31/12/2015 in Sunshine Hospitals. The medical reports and Discharge Summary filed by the Opposite Party show that the cataract operations performed on both the eyes of the complainant were successful as the complainant did not complain of any problem whatsoever in his vision and the treatment rendered to the complainant has not in anyway contributed to or caused the incident in question. There is no evidence on record by the complainant to show that there was any negligence on the part of the Opposite party while taking the complainant for post-operative investigation tests resulting in his leg fracture on falling down the stool/wheel chair.

As held in Kanhaiya Kumar Singh vs Park Medicare & Research Centre, III(1999) CPJ 9 (NC) negligence has to be established and cannot be presumed and in the present petition there is no cogent material to substantiate the allegation of Complainant against the Opposite Party, and in the absence of any substantial evidence establishing the negligence on the part of the Opposite party for the injury sustained by the complainant, this Court cannot but hold that the Complainant has failed to prove the allegations against the opposite party for the mishap suffered by the complainant.

7. Point No.2:- In view of the above findings of this Forum, the complainant is not entitled for any of the claims.
8. Point No.3:- In the result, the complaint is dismissed with no costs.
9.  

Be that as it may, the Forum made the following observations:

As the responsibility for patient safety does not begin and end with the treatment but extends to the incidental exposure of the patient in the hospital premises not only during the treatment but also post operative follow-up visits, it is advisable to

1. Have risk management procedures in place in supervising an elderly or visually impaired patient and 
2. Have written procedures establishing safety guidelines and practices to be followed by patients restraining  or warning of the risks of fracture/incidental accidents.
3. Have adequate fall prevention strategies/safety precautions to prevent  

older patients who are at increased risk of falling/slipping due to impaired balance, general weakness, cognitive ability, visual problems etc.

4. Have surveillance cameras to capture the movements of the patients   

and the acts/omissions of the attending hospital staff.

          Dictated to steno transcribed and typed by her and pronounced by us on this the    14^th     day of   November, 2019.

  MEMBER                                                   MEMBER                                                 PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                                        WITNESS EXAMINED

                                                                               NIL

Exhibits  filed on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.A1 -   Discharge summary

Ex.A2 to A4 – Advance receipt

Ex.A5  to A7– Copy of Pharmacy cash receipt

Ex.A8 –  Copy of bill cum receipt   

Ex.A9 –  Copy of  Legal notice dt.7.5.2016

Ex.A10 -  Acknowledgement card

Ex.A11 – Copy of  Doctors prescription

Ex.A12 – Sunshine brochure

Ex.A13 – Digital Xray of Sunshine hospital

Ex.A14 – Lucid X ray.

Exhibits  filed on behalf of the Opposite parties:

 Ex.B1 – Entire medical record of the complainant.

MEMBER                                        MEMBER                                          PRESIDENT