Prashant Kumar Mishra JUDGMENT
Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission1 dated 03.08.2010 whereby the complaint filed by the Appellant and proforma Respondent No. 3 Under Section 2(c)(iii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 19862 was rejected.
2. The complainant-Appellant is the wife of the deceased patient namely, Sankar Rajan3, who was 37 years old and died on 06.11.1998 in the hospital-Respondent No. 1 herein while undergoing follow up care and treatment after a major neurosurgery in the care of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The deceased was under the employment of proforma Respondent No. 3 and was earning handsome annual package at the time of his demise.
3. The deceased was suffering from Chiari Malformations (Type II) with Hydrocephalous. The deceased consulted Dr. Ravi Bhatia - Respondent No. 2, Senior Consultant, Department of Neurosurgery of Respondent No. 1-hospital on 21.10.1998, who advised him to get admitted to Respondent No. 1-hospital where the surgery would be performed by him. As per the advice of Respondent No. 2, the deceased got himself admitted to Respondent No. 1 on 29.10.1998. After performing pre-operative medical examinations, Respondent No. 2 conducted the operation of the deceased. The deceased was thereafter shifted to private room at about 04.15 p.m. and at about 04.30 p.m., the doctors visiting the deceased were informed about pain in the neck region, which seemed to have transferred downward lower than the region where pain used to occur prior to operation. At about 06.30 p.m. the deceased was given pain reliever intravenously, but the pain increased along with severe sweat spells. At about 09.15 p.m, the deceased started suffering from severe unbearable pain. The complainant-Appellant called Respondent No. 2 at his residential phone but he was not available. At about 09.30 p.m. another pain killer was intravenously given. At about 11.00 p.m. complainant-Appellant talked to Respondent No. 2 at his residence. The deceased had suffered heart attack around 11.00 p.m. The deceased was declared brain dead on 31.10.1998. He was kept on life support till his death on 06.11.1998.
4. The grievance of complainant-Appellant is that the deceased was not attended to by any doctor from neurosurgery team who had operated the deceased after he was shifted into the private room till 11.00 P.M. After such major surgery, instead of shifting to a private room, the deceased should have been shifted to the Intensive Care Unit4.
Findings of Commission (Impugned Order)
5. The allegation in the complaint is mainly apropos lack of medical care from the time he was shifted to the Private room till he suffered a cardiac arrest at around 11:00 PM. However, the Appellant herein has not been able to establish by any cogent evidence or material on record that the heart attack suffered by the deceased had any connection with the operation in question or on account of lack of post-operative care.
6. The said finding has been supported by an affidavit of Prof. Gulshan Kumar Ahuja who was professor of neurosurgery in AIIMS & Senior Consultant at R-1/hospital at that time and he has opined that........