Medical Negligence: Max Hospital, Doctors slapped Rs 10 lakh compensation
The order was given ex parte as the counsel for the doctors did not appear before the court.
Gurgaon: Holding a city-based Max hospital and its doctors guilty of medical negligence, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently directed them to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to the family of the patient, who died during treatment.
The matter goes back to 2021 when the complainant's mother was suffering from repetitive stomach pain. Ultrasound conducted by a doctor revealed that there were multiple stones in the patient's gall bladder. Therefore, the doctor advised that laparoscopy for removal of the gall bladder would have to be done.
Based on the advice, the complainant contacted the treating doctor, who after seeing the ultrasound report advised some more tests. Thereafter, she was admitted to Max Hospital, Gurgaon for undergoing endoscopy and laparoscopic surgery of the liver.
Accordingly, the operation was conducted. Allegedly, the treating doctor Dr. Jyoti did not conduct the surgery but it was done by a guest doctor in the hospital, Dr. Dhingra. Ultimately, the patient was discharged on 11.07.2021. The complainant submitted that the follow-up check up was done accordingly and after taking note of a report dated 23.08.2021, Dr. Jyoti observed that the parameters were better and "no medicine was needed".
It was alleged by the complainant that during the time of follow-up check up, they were never told that they also had to collect a Histopathology report, which clearly showed that the patient was suffering from cancer. Referring to this, the complainant alleged that the doctors and the hospital grossly failed in performing their duties to administer a basic scientific standard of medical care.
Allegedly, they only got to know the relevance of the Histopathology report when the patient got ultrasound report from an outside diagnostic center due to the patient's severe pain. Thereafter, the patient had to be readmitted to AIIMS Hospital on 30.03.2022, where the doctors enquired about the Histopathology report of the patient. The doctor of the diagnostic centre told the complainant that her mother had cancer.
The complainant alleged that when they approached the treating doctor Dr. Jyoti, he did not entertain them and asked them to show the report to Dr. Dhingra who conducted the surgery. Following this, Dr. Dhingra suggested some more PET CT Scan and other tests on 29.03.2022 and those tests were done and the reports and prescriptions of 28.03.2022 and 29.03.2022, initially showed Liver Metastasis and Carcinoma gallbladder metastases in PET CT scan. When the report was sent to Dr. Jyoti and the complainant asked specifically whether her mother had cancer, the doctor allegedly responded by saying 'YES'. It was alleged by the complainant that the treating doctor completely abandoned them after this and told the complainant that "there was no point in treating your mother anymore as she was bound to die" coupled with the observations that "treating the mother of the complainant would be a waste of money". Following this, the patient got admitted to AIIMS, Badsa, Haryana once again on 30.03.2022.
The complainant alleged that her mother had cancer way back on 27th July, 2021 itself but the doctors and the hospital failed to administer the basic scientific standard of medical care, resulting in reckless breach of their professional duty and gross negligence as an act of severe deficiency in service towards the patient, which ultimately, resulted in the death of the patient on 9th June 2022.
Further, the complainant argued that there was every possibility that if the patient had been diagnosed in time, she would have been alive, as proper treatment in that regard would have been given to the deceased on time.
The complainant also sent her complaint along with all the documents to the Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon on 24.05.2023 as well as the Chief Medical Officer, Gurgaon. She also filed a complaint before the consumer court and demanded Rs 50 lakh as compensation.
On the other hand, the treating doctor, preferred to proceed against ex-parte on 31.08.2023 by not opting to appear in the Court till 2:20 PM despite having been served, which was clear from the delivery confirmation report/tracking details.
"Since, the opposite parties in this case have been proceeded against ex-parte and there is no evidence on their behalf on the record of this file, so the evidence produced on the record of this file by the complainant go unrebutted, and, as such, this Commission does not find any reasons to disbelieve the same. Accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is accepted with costs," noted the consumer court.
"Accordingly, the OPs are directed, jointly and severally, to pay the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant for the treatment of her deceased mother which she had to incur/undergo for the treatment of her deceased mother before the OPs and various other hospitals/ Diagnostic Centers etc. including the AIIMS & others," ordered the consumer court.
"In the light of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case which are duly supported by the accurate, brief and concise evidence led by the complainant, this Commission also places it on the record of this file that the OPs in the present case just cannot escape their liability & guilt in respect of providing severe deficient services coupled with medical negligence to the subject patient, which, ultimately, resulted in the death of the subject deceased-patient namely ***i i.e. mother of the complainant, on account of which, the complainant had to suffer a severe mental pain, suffering and agony etc. besides loss of love and affection," it further noted.
Therefore, on account of the suffering of mental pain and agony as well as loss of natural love and affection to the complainant, which she had to undergo on account of the untimely death of her mother, the consumer court awarded the complainant with a compensation of Rs 10 lakh, "which in the peculiar circumstances of the present case, cannot be held anything else except a meagre amount in view of the fact that the complainant had to undergo the trauma of loss of natural love and affection of her mother, which as stated above, cannot be compensated or measured in terms of money judging from any angle by any stretch of imagination. The complainant is also hereby held entitled to the amount of Rs.55,000/- as litigation expenses. The remaining reliefs as have been claimed by the complainant are hereby declined being unnecessary, unwarranted and uncalled for. The opposite parties, jointly and severally, shall make the compliance of this order within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the additional penal interest @ 12% per annum shall also be paid by the OP to the complainant on the above awarded amount from the date of this order till realization."
To view the order, click on the link below:
