Dirty towels, contaminated soup: No medical negligence, but hospital held liable for deficiency in service, slapped Rs 30k compensation

Mohali: Noting that while there was no medical negligence, the hospital was deficient in service in providing promised amenities, the Mohali District Commission has directed a Chandigarh-based hospital to pay compensation of Rs 30,000 to a patient.

In its order, the forum found that the deficiency in service, including that of hygiene as well as food-related lapses, caused mental agony, harassment and thereafter litigation expenses to the patient.

The case concerns a patient who was admitted to M/s Kids Clinic India Pvt Ltd, Cloudnine Hospital and made allegations regarding the unsatisfactory experience and unhygienic amenities and services promised under the delivery package, including room decoration, card decoration, cake cutting ceremony.

Arguments:

The patient had opted for the “Bundle of Joy – C Section delivery package” for Rs. 75,000 after the discount of Rs.5,000. She was admitted to the hospital on 12.11.2022 for a Caesarean Section and delivered a healthy baby.

After the discharge, the patient had raised several concerns regarding the deficiencies in the services provided by the hospital. She alleged that the hospital failed to provide a qualified dietitian or supervisor and ignored her repeated requests for a suitable diet.

"Despite paying for the deluxe package, the amenities provided were substandard. The couch supplied for the attendant was dirty, unhygienic, foul-smelling and had not been properly cleaned. Despite repeated requests by the complainant and her husband, the couch was replaced only after two days. The towels supplied by the hospital were dirty, torn and unsuitable for use, but the hospital staff failed to replace them despite repeated complaints. Photographs depicting the condition of the couch, towels and other amenities have been placed on record," she argued.

The patient further alleged that she found a piece of plastic in the soup served to her. Considering that she had recently undergone surgery and was recovering after childbirth, she alleged that such negligence endangered her health and reflected gross mismanagement and poor quality control by the hospital.

"The hospital cancelled the promised cake -cutting ceremony at the last moment without prior notice, thereby depriving her family of an important part of the delivery package for which she had paid," she said in her complaint.

After being billed ₹1,03,192 upon discharge, she issued a legal notice seeking an apology, refund of the package amount and compensation. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, she approached the Consumer Commission.

The hospital denied the allegations of the deficiency and maintained that the complainant had successful medical treatment throughout her stay.

It was further submitted that throughout the complainant's four-day stay she received all necessary medical treatment, medicines and a balanced, nutritious diet specially designed for post-delivery mothers. The counsel for the hospital further denied that the complainant ever complained of constipation, cold or nasal congestion during her hospitalisation. They asserted that the patient herself was a professional dietitian and repeatedly insisted upon dictating her own diet plan instead of following the standard hospital diet.

The counsel further stated that, under the deluxe package, the hospital arranged various complimentary services such as room decoration, baby photographs, gift hampers and vehicle decoration.

Commission Distinguishes Medical Treatment from Ancillary Services:

While examining the matter, the consumer court noticed that the complainant was not related to any medical negligence in the treatment or the performance of C- Section by the hospital and the staff.

The nursing records and the discharge summary indicated that the procedure had been performed successfully and both the complainant and the newborn were in satisfactory condition at the time of discharge.

The Commission therefore considered whether there was a deficiency in the ancillary services and amenities provided to the complainant under the maternity package.

The Commission, however, did not accept the complainant's demand for a complete refund of the maternity package or compensation of Rs 3 lakh, particularly since there was no finding of medical negligence or any medical injury caused to the patient.

The Commission did not direct refund of the ₹75,000 maternity package amount or grant the compensation sought by the complainant. It held the hospital liable for deficiency in the service and ordered Rs. 30,000/ towards mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses.