Chennai consumer court slaps Rs 2 lakh compensation on dentist for extracting wrong tooth
Medical Negligence
Chennai: Holding a dentist guilty of negligence for removing the wrong tooth from a patient, the Chennai North District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) has directed the dentist to pay the patient Rs 2.05 lakh in compensation.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Chennai North) said the dentist could not justify deviating from the treatment plan, which clearly advised removal of a specific milk tooth.
The complainant approached an online orthodontic service, in January 2025 for fixing misaligned teeth. Consequently, an appointment was fixed for doorstep scanning and verification. For the process, the complainant paid Rs 60,000 as charges.
Later, the complainant/patient was directed to take an X-ray at a nearby dental clinic and was informed that milk teeth had to be removed before fixing the braces.
Thereafter, in February, following instructions from the company, a dentist at a clinic in Anna Nagar, removed the patient's tooth and issued a prescription, which clearly mentioned the brief history of the removed teeth.
After X-rays were approved, she was advised in writing and through WhatsApp messages to extract milk tooth No 53, reports TOI.
As per the media report by DTNext, later, an email was received from the company, and an appointment was made with another doctor, who, after examining the complainant's teeth, stated that a permanent tooth had been removed instead. Consequently, the patient visited the first dentist and questioned the negligence in removing the wrong tooth.
It was alleged that due to the wrong extraction of the tooth and the negligence of the dentist, the complainant had pain, bleeding, nerve injury, psychological distress, potential need for further treatment like a root canal or implant, and misalignment of remaining teeth.
The dentist at the hospital argued that the extracted tooth was a palatally placed permanent lateral incisor causing discomfort and claimed the prescription note referring to a milk tooth was only a preliminary record of the patient's complaint, adds TOI
The Commission rejected this defence, noting the absence of clinical records to support the decision to extract a different tooth.
While considering the matter, the District Consumer Court, headed by President D. Gopinath, found that the dentist had also noted in her prescription record that "patient wants to get her milk tooth removed." It was further observed that despite such a remark, instead of extracting the milk tooth, the dentist extracted the permanent tooth, as per their own record sheet of extractions done in February.
As a result, the commission allowed the complaint against the dentist and directed the dentist to pay Rs 2 lakh (inclusive of refund amount and other expenses) for medical negligence leading to deficiency in service with pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages.
Further, the District Consumer Court also directed the dentist to pay Rs 5,000 towards the cost of the complaint within two months.
