JUDGEMENT
M.THANIKACHALAM, J. -
(1.) This is a complaint filed under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act,
claiming a compensation of Rs.20 lakhs, on the basis of medical
negligence and deficiency in service.
(2.) Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the case:
The husband of the 1st complainant (deceased) viz. Srinivasan, father
of the complainants 2 and 3, was admitted in the 1st opposite party
hospital, on 14.12.97, for medical investigation. Even prior to that,
diagnostic angiogram was performed on 14.8.1997, and on that basis alone,
angioplasty was performed, in the month of December 1997. Thus the
opposite parties are guilty of negligence, even in the initial stage.
(3.) The 2nd opposite party, who treated Srinivasan, has administered
straightaway Ionic dye, resulting the fatality. Because of the negligence
committed viz. without giving test doze, ironic die of 5 ml., was
administered, it caused problem resulting anaphylaxis, preceding falling
of blood pressure. For 12 hours, though the opposite parties have
attempted to revive the heart, including femoral Femoral cardio pulmonary
bypass, which was not necessary and even not taking to ICU, where as
attended only at cath lab, they were unable to save the life of
Srinivasan, thereby all the opposite parties have committed deficiency in
service, failing to adopt the expected standard of care, ane even they
have not informed the problem to complainants, further they have also
failed to furnish the records to the complainants, despite notice issued.
Thus it is clear, due to the negligence and improper treatment of the
opposite parties, Srinivasan died, leaving behind the complainants,
causing mental agony, loss of earning etc., for which the complainants
are entitled to a sum of RS.2000000/-, as a whole. Thus claiming, a
consumer complaint was filed before this commission.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.