D.H.KUMARI Vs. DIRECTOR, NIZAMS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SERVICES
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Director, Nizams Institute Of Medical Services
Click here to view full judgement.
P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU,PRESIDENT -
(1.) THE first
complainant is the wife of second complainant and the complainants 3 to 5
are their children. She complained of acute pain in her knee joints.
After conducting necessary tests Dr. G. Narasimhulu, Rheumatologist
diagnosed that she was suffering from ˜Osteo Arthiritis of the bones
and hence she underwent treatment for the said problem till 11.9.1997.
Meanwhile she developed a painful lump in her left breast. Dr.
Narasimhulu referred her to Dr. G. Suryanarayana Raju, Surgical
Oncologist of oncology division of the opposite party, hereinafter called
the doctor, who on examination advised her to have a Fine Needle
Aspiration Cytology (FNAC) test for left breast. She accordingly
underwent the test at the pathology department of the opposite party. The
report was shown to the doctor on 17.9.1997 whereupon he advised her to
have Mammogram of her left breast from Apollo Hospital, Jubilee Hills,
Hyderabad. He advised her to get herself admitted as in -patient for
operation of the breast. He also informed her husband that she was
suffering from cancer of the left breast and that surgical intervention
was necessary. Accordingly, she was admitted on 18.9.1997 and mastectomy
was conducted on 19.9.1997 and her left breast was totally removed. The
doctor furnished two reports of the Histo -pathology Department which did
not record the existence of any cancer or carcinoma.
(2.) THE first complainant became mentally wreck due to physical disfigurement for the loss of her breast and lost interest in life. The
second complainant submitted FNAC slides pertaining to the first
complainants Mastectomy to the National Institute of Nutrition for their
opinion and the said Institute opined that there was no cancer and she
was wrongly operated upon for Mastectomy as she suffered abscess in the
left breast. Hence the complainant filed this complaint claiming a
compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs.
(3.) IN the written version filed by the opposite party, it is stated that after conducting necessary tests on the first complainant it
was felt that the painful lump in her left breast be removed pursuant to
the reports received in FNAC test at the pathology department of the
opposite party. The doctor rightly advised the first complainant to have
a Mammogram of her left breast from the Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad and on
obtaining the consent of the first complainant and her attendants removal
of her left breast was planned. The Director of NIMS obtained remarks
from Dr. K.S. Ratnakar, Head of the Department of Pathology who justified
removal of the breast. There is no negligence on the part of the opposite
The first complainant was examined as P.W. 1 besides marking Exhs. A -1 to A -10. The opposite party also filed the affidavit evidence
of its Executive Registrar besides marking Exhs. B -1 to B -26 which are
the case sheet and the remarks submitted by Dr. Ratnakar.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.