S. SARALA, ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL SERVICES Vs. SUNDARAM MEDICAL FOUNDATION
LAWS(TNCDRC)-2009-11-24
TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on November 17,2009

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The brief facts pertaining to the case as under:- The complainant while using Washing Machine in her house on 04.09.2004 at about 12.30 noon, met with an accident, in which, her right hand index finger, was caught in the Washing Machine and it was cut off. Immediately, she took the amputated finger in a plastic zipper bag and rushed to the first opposite partys hospital along with her husband at about 1 p.m. where the duty doctor gave pain killer injection as well put a bandage. Though the complainant expected the specialist-qualified plastic surgeon to attend on her immediately, commence reconstructive surgery for re-implantation of the amputated finger, she was disappointed by the lack of immediate medical attention, indifference and delay in commencing the surgery, thereby, diminishing the possibility of recovery. After questioned/complaint by Muthukumar, brother of the complainant, there was some progress.
(2.) Only at 6 p.m., the second opposite party a specialist in Reconstructive Cosmetic Plastic Surgery arrived, examined the wound as well the amputated finger and was confident that plastic surgery would be successful. He further assured the patient of full recovery. At 6.45 p.m. the complainant was taken to the operation theatre, given anesthesia at 7.30 p.m., thereafter she did not know what happened till she regained consciousness around 10.30 p.m. She was taken to the room allotted to her at 11.30 p.m. The surgeon did not come to the room, who was bound to come to the post operative room and examine the patient after the surgery. Failure to do so, is a case of negligence on his part and complications arising thereon is attributable to the first opposite party vicariously and also on the second opposite party personally.
(3.) On 05.09.2004, the second opposite party visited the room and questioned about the allotment of air-conditioned room, instead of an ordinary room. On examination, the second opposite party said that there was good blood circulation and the operation was successful and before that till 9 a.m., he did not care to examine the wound, after surgery.;


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