SC enhances compensation ordered by Consumer Forum on KIMS, doctor for alleged negligence in treating Renal stone

The bench of Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice Dipankar Datta, enhanced the compensation amount by Rs 3.8 lakh.

The patient had approached the hospital wherein the doctor employed with regard to the treatment due to abdominal pain advised to remove the Renal stone noticed during examination. Accordingly, treatment was administered. Though, initially the stone was crushed and was required to be flushed out, it had not in the normal course flushed out. Hence, a stent was introduced. Even thereafter since there was certain medical complications, operation had been advised. The patient, however on experiencing pain and discomfort had thereafter contacted the Kasturba Medical College, Manipal wherein subsequently the operation has been conducted and by that time since it was diagnosed that the kidney was affected, one of his kidney was removed.

It is in this background, the patient had approached the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission claiming compensation.

Meanwhile, the Kerala Institute of Medical Science (KIMS) and the doctor had filed their version before the State Commission and indicated the manner of the treatment that was to be administered and sought to justify their action contending that the best medical advice was given and the complainant himself was negligent since, as had been advised by them, the complainant had not visited them within time and therefore, if any, complication had arisen the hospital and the doctor cannot be held liable.

The State Commission at the first instance, has arrived at the conclusion that the doctor was negligent to a certain extent and the liability is to be shared by the hospital wherein the treatment was administered.

However, since the State Commission was of the opinion that the complainant had also caused delay in approaching the KMC Hospital, Manipal, certain contributory negligence was to be attributed to the complainant herein. It is in this light, though the State Commission had arrived at the compensation of Rs.6,20,000/- it was apportioned and only a sum of Rs. 3,10,000/- was awarded with cost of Rs. 5000/-. Against such conclusion reached by the State Commission through its judgment dated 19.05.2009 all the parties moved the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).

The NCDRC though upheld the finding so far as negligence on the part of the hospital and the doctor amounting to deficiency, had set aside the finding relating to contributory negligence and awarded the entire amount of Rs.6,20,000/-.

In this backdrop, the parties moved the Supreme Court wherein the complainant sought enhancement of the compensation, while the hospital and the doctor were assailing the finding relating to medical negligence amounting to deficiency.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length, and perusing the appeal papers, the apex court observed;

"In a matter of the present nature, when it is seen that the appellant-complainant had approached the respondent-hospital and was being advised the various forms of treatment from the time of his first consultation and also taking into consideration the manner in which he has been subsequently treated in KMC Hospital, Manipal, in the present facts and circumstances, we feel that the negligence as attributed to the respondent nos. 1 (hospital) and 2 (doctor) cannot in an absolute term be accepted since from time to time the manner of treatment was being indicated and was also being followed up. In any event, there is no definite evidence to the effect that it is the treatment that which led to the failure of the kidney. The Doctor from KMC Hospital, Manipal who was examined before SCDRC has not disapproved the process followed by the doctor."

"Be that as it may, taking into consideration the hardship that has been gone through by the complainant in undergoing the entire process over and over again, to some extent the compensation in any event cannot be said as unjustified though it cannot be by holding the hospital and the doctor as negligent. Even if that be the position, we are of the opinion that in the present facts and circumstances of the case, to render a quietus to the situation, even though we are inclined to set aside the finding relating to negligence against respondent nos. 1 and 2, in exercise of our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, in order to do complete justice, we feel it appropriate that adequate compensation is to be provided to the complainant herein."

It pronounced;

"As already noted, the amount of Rs.6,20,000/- has been awarded by the NCDRC. A further sum of Rs. 3,80,000/- shall be paid by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severally, to the appellant in C.A.No. 3903/2019 within four weeks, which shall be in full and final settlement of all claims of the appellant. It is made clear that if the said amount is not paid within a period of four weeks from this day, the same shall thereafter carry interest @ 9 % per annum till the date of payment of the amount. All the appeals are disposed of in the above terms."

To view the original order, click on the link below: