NIRMAL PRASAD AGGARWAL Vs. HIMALAYAN INSTITUTE HOSPITAL
LAWS(UTNCDRC)-2009-12-2
UTTARAKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on December 02,2009

Nirmal Prasad Aggarwal Appellant
VERSUS
Himalayan Institute Hospital Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS is complainant's appeal against the order dated 9.9.2003 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 257 of 2000, Nirmal Prasad Aggarwal v. Himalayan Institute Hospital & Ors. Vide the impugned order, the District Forum has dismissed the consumer complaint.
(2.) THE dispute involved in this appeal is in respect of the alleged medical negligence made by the opposite parties in the treatment of the complainant Sh. Nirmal Prasad Aggarwal. The complainant had met with an accident on 30.7.1998, in which his right hand was severely injured, sustaining multiple fractures. For the first aid/preliminary treatment, the complainant remained hospitalized in Acharya R.N. Kela Jankalyan Hospital, Najibabad, District Bijnor from 30.7.1998 to 12.8.1998. Thereafter, the doctors of the said hospital referred him to Himalayan Institute Hospital, Jolly Grant, Dehradun, where he was admitted on 13.8.1998. On 19.8.1998, his hand was operated upon by the doctors with the technique of bone grafting. For bone grafting, bone was scratched from the bone of his right thigh. The operation was successful and his hand was cured, but the complainant complained of pain in his right leg, from where the bone was scratched. The complainant was discharged from the hospital on 1.9.1998 with the direction for follow -up checkup after one and a half months. Regarding his complaint for pain in right leg, he was told by the opposite party Nos.2 to 5, i.e., the treating doctors that it would subside in due course of time. The stitches in the leg were also removed on that day. However, the pain in the leg persisted and became more intense. On 14.10.1998, the complainant visited the hospital for the follow -up checkup as directed by the treating doctors. During the checkup of the treated hand, the complainant also complained of the condition of his right leg, which had stopped functioning properly, but the treating doctors (opposite party Nos. 2 to 5) consoled him again that it would get cured and would be all right gradually. The complainant visited the opposite parties from time -to -time. Every time the doctors used to prescribe some medicines, but the condition of the leg remained the same. Ultimately, on 17.11.1998, the complainant asked the opposite party No. 5 to tell him the reality of his case. The opposite party No. 5 told him that during the operation of his right leg, a nerve had been cut due to mistake, which has caused this problem. The opposite party No. 5 regretted for the mistake and requested the complainant not to take any legal action in this regard. It was also told that no treatment for the leg was possible. When the opposite parties refused to help him either by treating the leg or by compensating for the wrong they had done to the complainant, the complainant sent a notice dated 4.8.1999 to the opposite parties through his Counsel. While the opposite party Nos. 1 and 4 refused to take the notice, the other opposite parties did not reply the same. Upon this, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Dehradun. The District Forum, after an appreciation of the facts of the case and the material on record, dismissed the consumer complaint vide its order dated 9.9.2003. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant has filed this appeal.
(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The appellant - complainant had also appeared in person. We have also perused the material placed on record in the light of the legal aspects of the case. The complainant has made very serious allegations against the opposite party Nos. 2 to 5. In complainant's own words, as stated in the complaint, some of such allegations are as under: "(Hindi matter omitted)";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.