OM PRAKASH Vs. C D SHARMA
LAWS(UTRCDRC)-2006-10-1
UNION TERRITORY STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on October 03,2006

OM PRAKASH Appellant
VERSUS
C D Sharma Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THE complaint was filed through Mr. S.R. Hooda, Advocate. Mr. S.R. Hooda, Advocate has been served through courier service but none is present on behalf of the appellant.
(2.)BRIEFLY stated the facts are that Mr. Om Prakash had filed a complaint against Dr. C.D. Sharma of Shanti Hospital and Diagnostic Centre, Baroda Road, Gohana (District Sonepat) on the allegation; that he was suffering from urine problem and the respondent had conducted ultrasound on 15.2.1997 in Shanti Hospital and Diagnostic Centre and after examining the ultrasound report opined that he was suffering from enlargement of prostate and advised for operation. On the advice of the respondent, he was admitted in the hospital on the said day and operation was conducted after 3 -4 days of the admission. Ultimately, he was discharged from the hospital after 20 days of the operation and was advised to get himself checked after every duration of 3 days. He had been regularly visiting the clinic of the respondent as advised by him but urine started oozing from the stitches and immediately he contacted the respondent and on the advice of the respondent, he was again admitted in the hospital and was operated upon for second time and then was discharged after 7 days. However, his condition did not improve and became worst and then he started suffering from pain as puss developed in his stitches. Ultimately the matter went out of his control and was advised to get himself cured from some other docotor and thus he got treatment as outdoor patient from Army Hospital, Delhi Cantt. He was admitted in medical hospital on 19.3.1998 and was discharged on 8.5.1998. He was readmitted on 13.6.1998 and discharged on 4.7.1998 and then again admitted on 23.7.1998 and discharged on 30.7.1998 and then lastly he was admitted on 4.8.1998 and discharged on 12.8.1998 and was still getting treatment. He had incurred Rs. 40,000 on his treatment before getting himself admitted in the Army Hospital.
(3.)ALLEGING deficiency in service and negligence on the part of respondent, the complaint was filed and claimed Rs. 3,00,000 as damages.
The respondent contested the complaint and stated that the appellant was never operated upon by him. He denied that the appellant was never admitted in his hospital except during the duration 19.3.1997 to 21.3.1997 with the problem of dysentery of which he was cured. However, it was admitted that Dr. C.D. Sharma conducted ultrasound and his prostate was found to be enlarged but asserted that thereafter the appellant never contacted him and was never operated upon by him.



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