R.S. Sharma, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 22.12.2012, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (C.G.) (henceforth "District Forum") in Complaint Case No. 141/2012. By the impugned order, the complaint of the appellant/complainant, has been dismissed by the District Forum. Briefly stated, the facts of the complaint of the appellant/complainant are, that the respondents/OPs are Directors of Wiro Research & Care Clinic. On 24.1.2011, Smt. Khemlata Sahu, who was wife of the appellant/complainant fell ill and she had taken to the hospital of the respondents/OPs. The appellant/complainant had taken Smt. Khemlata Sahu, on pursuance of advertisement published in daily newspaper. The respondents/OPs registered Smt. Khemlata Sahu, in their hospital and her registration No. was 068/11 and she was advised for blood test. The blood test was conducted in the hospital of the respondents/OPs. In the blood test report, it is mentioned that HIV was positive, thereafter the respondents/OPs started giving treatment to Smt. Khemlata Sahu. Smt. Khemlata Sahu started taking medicines from 3.2.2011, but she was not responded to the treatment given by the respondents/OPs. The respondents/OPs gave instruction slip to the wife of the appellant/complainant and according to the instruction slip given by the respondents/OPs, the deceased was taking medicines, but due to side effect of the medicines, Smt. Khemlata Sahu died on 9.2.2011. Thus, the respondents/OPs committed medical negligence. Therefore, the appellant/complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Forum against the respondents/OPs and prayed for compensation of Rs. 4,00,000, for funeral expenses Rs. 50,000, compensation for mental agony Rs. 4,00,000, medicine expenses Rs. 50,000 and cost of litigation Rs. 2,000 totalling Rs. 9,02,000
(2.) THE respondents/OPs file their written statement before the District Forum and denied the allegation levelled by the appellant/complainant. They averred that Smt. Khemlata Sahu came in their hospital on 24.1.2011 and they advised, her for blood test, thereafter Suit. Khemlata Sahu and the appellant/complainant never came the hospital of the respondents/OPs. The respondents/OPs had not given medicines to Smt. Khemlata Sahu for the period of three months. The appellant/complainant falsely implicated them. The respondents/OPs have not committed any medical negligence. The appellant/complainant is not entitled for any compensation. The report of the Medical Board also does not disclose any medical negligence on the part of the respondents/OPs. The appellant/complainant is not entitled for any compensation and the con plaint is liable to be dismissed. After due appreciation of material available on the record, learned District Forum held that the appellant/complainant has not been able to prove that the respondents/OPs had treated Smt. Khemlata Sahu, the wife of the appellant/complainant. The District Forum further observed that the appellant/complainant has not been able to prove that there was medical negligence on the part of the respondents/OPs and dismissed the complaint.
(3.) MR . R.K. Bhawnani, learned Counsel for the appellant/complainant submitted that appellant/complainant went to the hospital of the respondents/OPs along with his wife Smt. Khemlata Sahu (deceased) and respondents/OPs gave medicines to her for three months. The respondents/OPs gave prescription to the patient and according to the blood test report givers by the respondents/OPs the wife of the appellant/complainant was suffering from HP/and report of HIV was positive in the said report. According to Chandrakar Patho Lab, the HIV report is negative. It appears that the respondents/OPs gave false report. He further argued that the respondents/OPs gave prescription and instructions for using the medicine given by them. On being instructions given by the respondents/OPs, Smt. Khemlata Sahu was taking medicines according to the instructions given in the prescription and due to side effect of the medicines, Smt. Khemlata Sahu died. He further argued that the respondents/OPs did not given proper explanation to the District Ayurved Medical Board. Even respondents/OPs did not submit their Medical Certificate and other documents before the Medical Board. It appears that the respondents/OPs deliberately suppressed the material facts, therefore, the adverse inference may be drawn against them and looking to the circumstances and report of the Medical Board, it appears that the respondents/OPs gave wrong medicines to the deceased and due to wrong medicines and the side effect of the medicines, Smt. Khemlata Sahu died. Therefore, the respondents/OPs committed gross medical negligence and they are liable to pay compensation to the appellant/complainant and the learned District Forum, committed jurisdictional error and the order of the District Forum, suffers from irregularity and illegality and is liable to be set aside. He placed reliance on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of V. Kishan Rao v. Nikhil Super Specialty Hospital & Anr., : III (2010) CPJ 1 (SC) : V (2010) SLT 349.;