M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) Brief facts necessary for disposal of the case:- On 21.11.2004, the complainant had a fall from a tree and sustained injury on his right side scrotum,, as a stick pierced the scrotum, for which, he approached the opposite party-doctor for treatment at about 12 p.m. The opposite party examining the complainant, noticing an open wound, gave saline wash, widened the injury and according to him, there was no such foreign body available, thereby he closed the wound by sutures, for which, he had collected a sum of Rs.2,000/-. The pain, problem has not come to an end and therefore, he approached the opposite party on 28.11.2004, on which date, sutures were removed and the complainant was informed that there may be some pain because of the removal of the suture and it will be alright in due course of time. But, as informed by the opposite party, there was no complete healing, swelling continued, even suspecting pus and therefore, the complainant approached the doctor at Mannarkudi by name Asokan, who had examined the complainant on 1.12.2005 and gave treatment upto 5.1.2005 as inpatient. During the investigation, doctor has noticed, a foreign body was inside the scrotum, for that, surgery was performed at Government Hospital, Mannarkudi and finally discharged on 19.1.2005. Thus, due to improper diagnosis and negligence committed in not treating the injury properly at the first instance, the complainant had suffered for 36 days, spending Rs.50,000/-, causing mental agony, which is to be reimbursed by the opposite party, since failed, despite legal notice. This consumer complaint is filed for the recovery for a sum of Rs.3 lakhs.
(3.) The appellant/opposite party would contend that he had treated the complainant/patient, as per the medical procedure and his sincere attempt to find out any foreign body, was not visible at that time. He has further stated that the x-ray, clinical examination has not revealed the presence of foreign body and therefore, treating the patient as per the established procedure, he closed the injury by sutures and prescribed medicines as well as Antibiotic and discharged on the same day, which cannot be treated as deficiency in service. The complainant, as advised, come for review on 28.11.2004, on which date, this opposite party noticed only a small amount of swelling, then removing the sutures, prescribing medicines, advised him to come for review, if there is any fresh complaint or if the swelling does not disappear. Within three or four days, the complainant came to the opposite party, complaining swelling did not get reduced, examination revealed no abnormality causing concern except the small amount of swelling at right scrotum and therefore, advised him to come for review after one week, informing the sensitiveness, if surgery is needed. The complainant did not turn up for review and later the opposite party came to know, that he went to Government Hospital at Mannarkudi and removed a foreign body by intervention of surgical procedure, for which, the opposite party cannot be held responsible, claiming a sum of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation, since he has not deviated any acceptable, established procedure in giving treatment to the complainant.;