BEACH CHENNAI HOSPITAL Vs. S.P.ALAGAPPAN
LAWS(TNCDRC)-2011-6-22
TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on June 24,2011

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The 1st opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) Facts leading to this appeal: The minor complainant, aged about 12 years, was suffering from nasal block, for which he was admitted in the 1st opposite party hospital on 31.10.2003, where he was examined and operated by the 2nd opposite party, on 1.11.2003, after administering anesthesia. The complainant while taken to the operation theatre, had no injury of any kind, including burns on his body. After surgery, when he was brought back to the post-operative ward, the mother noticed a burn injury on his left leg, on the back of the knee, which was informed immediately, for which the opposite parties have not given any direct reply, how the complainant had sustained burn injury, whereas they were giving evasive reply. Within 2 or 3 days of the postoperative period, the injury due to burn, became so severe, and acute, the complainant had completely lost the sensitiveness in his left leg, leading paralysis for which the opposite party should be held responsible, since they have committed negligent act, by their supine indifference, carelessness, causing mental agony to the complainant.
(3.) The condition of the complainant became worse day by day, and there was no improvement, and therefore he was discharged from the 1st opposite party on 6.11.2003, and admitted as inpatient on 7.11.2003 in National Hospital, Chennai, where the injury was investigated, diagnosed as "Post Burn Eschar Left Lateral aspect of Popliteral Fossa with left Peroneal Nerve Palsy", for which surgery was undertaken including Escherectomy and Flap Transposition and Skin Grafting on 17.11.2003. The complainant was discharged from the National Hospital, with direction to come as Domictllary for Galvanic Nerve Stimulation. The complainant was also advised that Tendon Transfer Surgery has to be performed at a later date if there is total irreversible permanent foot drop due to non viability of the damaged nerve. Thus by the negligent act of the opposite parties , the complainant was compelled to take treatment for 31/2 months, and even after the treatment, the left leg of the complainant was practically became unusable and the complainant limb, even to walk, requiring further surgery to improve his position. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to compensation for pain and sufferings Rs.2 lakhs, as compensation for permanent disability if any Rs.5,25,000/-, compensation for the loss of earning power Rs.2 lakhs, including a medical expenses of Rs.75000/-, totaling a sum of Rs.10 lakhs, claiming the above said compensation, though notice issued, there was no compliance, thereby the complainant was compelled to file the consumer complaint, for the relief.;


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