G.VENKATESHWAR RAO Vs. SIDHANTHAPU VENKATALAXMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.206/2006 on the file of District Forum, Karimnagar, the opposite parties preferred this appeal. 2

(2.) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that on 19-2-2002 the complainant went to opposite party No.1 hospital for delivery of her second child and the second opposite party performed a major operation and immediately after the delivery, opposite party No.2 also performed tubectomy and she was treated in the same hospital under the supervision of opposite party No.3. Opposite parties issued Birth and Sterilization Certificate dated 19-2-2002 and the complainant submits that she paid an amount of Rs.15,000/- to the opposite parties towards hospital charges and other expenses. On 8-4-2006 she visited the opposite parties for medical check up since she was suffering from stomach pain. Opposite party No.3 conducted tests on the complainant and confirmed that she was one and half months pregnant. The complainant submits that after having two children it was difficult for her to bring up the third child and if the third child is born to the complainant, their elections will be cancelled because both she and her husband were elected to the Gram Panchayat elections. She submitted that it is only because of the negligence of opposite party No.2 that her tubectomy operation failed and therefore she got issued a legal notice to the opposite parties and filed the complaint seeking direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation.

(3.) Opposite party No.2 filed counter on behalf of opposite parties 1 and 3 also and they contended that even though tubectomy operation is successfully done, there are still chances of the patient to conceive and submitted that even when tubal occlusion operations are successfully performed and all technical precautions are taken, intra-uterine pregnancy occurs subsequently in 0.3% cases. This is because an ovum gains access to spermatozoa through a recannalized inner segment of the tube. They also contended that no method of sterilization is entirely safe and complete and there are possibilities of failure of operation due to many natural reasons also. They relied on several judgements including the judgement of the Apex Court reported in CPR 2006 (1) S.C.128 in which it was held that if the patient conceived after tubectomy operation, it does not amount to negligence.