KHANNA NURSING HOME Vs. RADHA KRISHNA
LAWS(DELCDRC)-2009-2-6
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on February 19,2009

Khanna Nursing Home Appellant
VERSUS
RADHA KRISHNA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

WHITEHOUSE V. JORDAN AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
MAYNARD V. WEST MIDLANDS REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
SIDWAY V. BETHLEM ROYAL HOSPITAL GOVERNORS AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

J.D.KAPOOR,PRESIDENT (ORAL) - (1.)ON the allegations of medical negligence for leaving part of the placenta in the body of the woman due to which she died leaving behind small children, the appellants have been vide impugned order dated 18.5.2005, directed to pay a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 as compensation to the respondents being the legal heirs of the woman.
(2.)FEELING aggrieved the appellants have preferred this appeal.
(3.)ALLEGATIONS of the respondents leading to the impugned order in brief are that the deceased Smt. Manju Sharma was the second wife of the respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 had two daughters from the earlier marriage. The deceased had earlier given birth to two daughters and was pregnant for the third time The respondent No. 1 had got admitted the wife with the appellant No. 1 nursing home which was being run by appellant No. 3. Appellant No. 2 was obstetrician and gynaecologist and was the wife of appellant No. 3. Wife of the respondent No. 1 was on the verge of her third normal full term delivery and was hospitalized in the appellant No. 1 Nursing Home on 15.1.2002 at 9.30 p.m. for conduction of delivery. At the time of hospitalization in the appellant No. 1 nursing home, the patient was normal expect that she was leaking from her private parts and was in labour pains. On 16.2.2002 at about 5.50 p.m. normal baby girl weighing about 3.5 kg was delivered by the wife of respondent No. 1. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had informed the respondent No. 1that both mother as well as her new born baby were in sound health. After delivery neither respondent No. 1 nor his relatives were allowed to enter into labour room either to see patient or the newly born baby. However, at about 7 p.m. the appellant No. 2 came out from the labour room and informed respondent No. 1 that life of the patient/deceased was in danger and he was asked to arrange 3 units of blood immediately.
The respondent No. 1 was kept in darkness about the actual condition of his wife. Before respondent No. 1 and other relatives could recover from the sudden shock, appellant No. 2 informed his family members that the patient should be immediately shifted to Sunder Lal Jain Hospital for better treatment and consequently, the respondent had immediately shifted his wife to Sunder Lal Hospital. At that time she was totally pale and was unconscious and when he had taken his wife to the casualty ward at Sunder Lal Jain Hospital at 7.30 p.m., the concerned doctor on duty had declared the patient as 'brought dead'. The police was informed by the doctors of Sunder Lal Jain Hospital and consequently mandatory inquest proceedings were conducted by the concerned SDM, Model Town and Dr. Vinay Singh had conducted post -mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and on getting the copy of the post -mortem examination, respondent No. 1 came to know that appellants were grossly negligent and they failed to detect and remove remaining 1/3rd part of placenta from the gravid uterus of the deceased and that it resulted into excessive bleeding which finally resulted into the death of the patient.



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