LexTARA CHAND JAIN versus SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A TARA CHAND JAIN v. SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL AND ANR. DECEMBER 15, 2005 B [ARIJIT PASAYAT AND TARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.] Consumer Protection Act, 1986: Medical negligence-Deficiency in service-Claim for compensation- C Finding by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission that complainant failed to establish allegations of negligence-Appeal-Held, findings of Commission do not suffer from any infirmity requiring interference. Practice and Procedure: D Proceedings before National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-Held, are not akin to a suit though some of provisions of Code of Civil Procedure are pressed into service as part of fair procedure while adjudicating the matter-Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Appellant underwent prostrate operation in respondent No. 1 hospital. E lt was the case of the appellant that after the operation he started feeling acute pain in his thigh muscle and backbone; and that the tendency of continuous and regular flow of urine which had started after the operation continued. He filed a claim petition before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the Hospital and the doctor who performed the operation. The respondent denied the allegation and contended that there was no F grievance of the nature alleged by the complainant at the time of discharge from the hospital and the claim petition was filed about four years after the operation. The Commission dismissed the claim petition. Aggrieved, the complainant filed the appeal. G Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: I. It is not a case where the Commission has not referred to the material on record. On the contrary, on a perusal of the record, the Commission has come to a conclusion that the complainant has failed to establish the allegations of negligence. This finding recorded by the H 812 TARA CHAND JAIN v. SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL [PASAYAT, J.]813 Commission does not suffer from any infirmity to warrant interference. The A pivotal documents do not in any way substantiate the appellant's case. They do not establish, as rightly observed by the Commission, that the incontinence of appellant was due to cut of sphincter muscle during operation performed by respondent No. 2. (816-B-DI 2. The proceedings before the Commission are not akin to that of a suit, B though some of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, t 908 are pressed into service as a part of a fair procedure while adjudicating the matter. (816-C) CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6930of1999. From the Judgment and Order dated 25.8.99 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Original Petition No. 43 of 1993. Y.P. Singh, C. Siddharth, Mrs. P. Pumima, Mrs. V. Singh, Mrs. Viraj, Mukesh K. Sharma and Debasis Misra for the Appellants. Vinay Bhasin, S. Raina, Sanjeev Kr. Singh, Ms. Sheenam Parwanda and Bhargava V. Desai with him for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by c D ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 25th E August, 1999 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (in short 'the Commission'). The appellant made a claim for compensation alleging that on the ground of medical negligence on the part of the respondents, he had suffered untold miseries and had spent a huge amount of money to get cured without any avail. The background facts disclosed in the complaint were to the effect that the appellant visited the respondent No. l - hospital as he was having urinary trouble. The respondent No. 2 with his team examined the complainant and advised him to undergo prostate operation. The complainant was admitted in F the hospital on 10.01.1990 and was operated by respondent No. 2 on 11.01.1990. G He was discharged from the hospital on 15.01.1990. At the time of discharge, he was advised to take some medicines and was told that he would be perfectly normal within one or two months. The complainant returned to his native place, i.e. Muzaffamagar and duly followed the advise given and the treatments prescribed. Instead of getting relief, he started feeling acute pain in the thigh muscles and backbone. The tendency of continuous and regular H 814 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005) SUPP. 5 S.C.R. A flow of urine which had started immediately after the operation continued. He suffered high fever and increase in blood urea and as a result, his condition become very serJous. H
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.