O R D E R
By Sri.C.T.Sabu, President
The case of the complainant is that he was an inpatient of the opposite parties’ treatment centre for Panchakarma treatment. Complainant was admitted on 14/5/2013. The inpatients were not permitted to go outside the premises but allowed to walk inside on hospital verandha. The complainant’s car was parked within the premises from the day of his admission. On 24/5/2013 evening security person ordered to the complainant to remove the vehicle from the hospital premises. When the reason for the same was asked, it was replied that the first opposite party has decided to stop the parking facility to the inpatients. Complainant’s bystander was his wife who does not know driving. Complainant was residing forty kilometers away and he could not arrange a driver to remove the car from the premises. Opposite parties were not willing to give parking facility and problems in between them continued. On 26/5/2013 complainant was ill-treated in the presence of his visitor by the security person. A junior doctor named Afsal also joined with the security person to shout and misbehave with the complainant. As alleged, the harassed and insulted complainant reacted with them asking whether he is a prisoner or not in the hospital? Disregarding the rights of a patient the opposite parties discharged the complainant in the middle of the treatment on 26/5/2013 stating in a discharge sheet that complainant has not obeyed the rules of the hospital and was indifferent with bad behaviour. A detailed discharge summary as well as treatment records were not given and it amounted to an unilateral discharge without completing the treatment. Complainant asserts that there are no any valid reason and the above action was taken without enquiring the true facts but instigated by a wrong telephonic information given by the biased junior doctor Afsal. Complainant has paid a sum of Rs.2,000/- on his admission and on 26/5/2013 a sum of Rs.35/-. There is a serious deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Complainant reiterates that he has never disobeyed any rules and never behaved indifferently and badly. He was very much cautious and conscious being an inpatient and took admission for a treatment. Repeated insult first by the security and a junior doctor and then by the 1st opposite party tantamount to serious deficiency in service by an arbitrary act of discharge from the hospital without completing the panchakarma treatment. Stoppage of treatment in the middle of a course of treatment results irreparable damage and sufferings. Complainant was forced to spend more than Rs.20,000/- to complete the treatment. Complainant alleges that he is very much aggrieved and also lost his honor, dignity, fame and identity because of the acts of the opposite parties. A lawyer notice was sent on 4/6/2013 which was replied again with a negative attitude. It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Commission may direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.20,000/- to the complainant towards treatment expenses, Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, physical pain and other losses and also costs towards litigation expenses.
2. Admitted the case. Issued notice to opposite parties. Appeared before the Commission through counsel and filed version. As stated by them, the complaint is not maintainable. All allegations are denied being false and incorrect. The treatment given to the complainant was not panchakarma but certain podikizhis with oil and kashayam besides tabs. Permanent car parking facility was not there. Security person had reminded the complainant the same in all humility only. The allegation that Dr.Afsal and the security person jointly threatened the complainant is false and against facts and also never said about stopping the treatment. As in every hospital there are restriction on visitors time. It is from 4pm to 6pm at evening. On Sundays 2.30pm to 6pm. The alleged visitor on 26/5/2013 was the father in law of the inpatient named
Vipin admitted in the same room of the complainant. In fact he visited at 11.20am violating the visitors time rules. On disallowing his visit Mr.Vipin and the complainant as creating a big scene assaulting and attacking the security, Dr.Afsal and staff nurses. This has obstructed the smooth and peaceful functioning of the hospital. There were no other alternative but to discharge the complainant on emergent basis in order to avoid further violence. A detailed discharge summary was ready but the complainant left the hospital without accepting those records. The best treatment is given to all. Above all, excellent behavior is also shown to inpatients as well as to others. A reply notice was also given explaining the reason for discharge. It is evident that there is no cause of action for filing this complaint. As there is no any deficiency in service complaint may be dismissed with costs.
3. The case then posted for evidence. The points for consideration are the following :
1) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2) If yes, what are the reliefs and costs ?
4. Both parties filed proof affidavits, documents and argument notes. From the side of complainant 6 documents were submitted and marked as Exts.P1 to P6. Complainant was examined and his deposition is marked as PW1. Mr.Vipin the other inpatient was also examined and his deposition is marked as PW2. From the side of opposite parties 4 documents were produced and marked as Exts.R1 to R4.
5. Appreciation of evidence : On examination of documents, proof affidavits, argument notes this Commission is convinced that the complainant was admitted for back pain treatment. There is no special case of medical negligence in the line of treatment. The bone of contention has nothing to do with panchakarma treatment also. In the instant case, the disputed facts are strictly in terms of behavioural aberrations. Ego, a necessary factor in every human beings has tried to overstep into the next stage of “Ahankara”. Hospital authorities have knowingly or unknowingly failed to respect the rights of patients especially inpatients in particular necessitating days long treatment. Complainant’s car was parked for a number of days. Hospital authorities have a responsibility to extend all facilities and amenities to a customer/consumer. The depositions of PW1 and PW and proof affidavit submitted by the complainant would clearly show that security person, doctor and staff nurses have not shown a standard behavior expected from a reasonable authority. A doctor in a hospital where panchakarma treatment is given must be competent to deal with any type of patients may be mental or with some other aberrations. He ought to have behaved on a different pedestal controlling a violent patient even. It is matter of pity that the hospital authorities have acted like an unreasonable and despotic authority trampling the genuine rights of an inpatient. Was there any misbehavior from the inpatient a complaint could have been lodged by the security person in writing to the hospital authority. An explanation in writing could have been obtained of an action like premature discharge was required or indispensable. The documents submitted by the opposite parties are quiet insufficient to support their contentions that the complainant has violated the rules and regulations. On contrary, the complainant has succeeded to prove his case. This Commission is inclined to give a right verdict in favour of complainant on finding that there is a deficiency in service.
6.Reliefs and costs : We direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) towards cost within 30 days from the receipt of a copy of this order. Complaint allowed accordingly.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 30th day of October 2020.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
Sreeja.S Dr.K.Radhakrishnan Nair C.T.Sabu
Member Member President
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1 Discharge Note dtd. 26/5/13
Ext.P2 Copy of lawyer notice dtd. 1/6/13
Ext.P3 Postal receipts
Ext.P4 Reply notice dtd. 14/6/13
Ext.P5 Bill dtd. 14/5/13
Ext.P6 Bill dtd. 7/6/13
Complainant’s witnesses
PW1 – Mohanan.V.v
PW2 – Vibin E Harilal
Opposite Parties Exhibits
Rxt.R1 Copy of lawyer notice dtd. 1/6/13
Ext.R2 Copy of reply notice dtd. 14/6/13
Ext.R3SP) Admission/Discharge sheet
Ext.R4(SP) Discharge summary
Id/-
President
