K.L. BHOLA vs KHERA HOSPITAL

-THERE cannot be a worst case of inhuman and professionally unethical approach of a member of medical profession qua the patients. Medical profession has down the ages been held as most noble profession and rightly so as the members of medical profession not only serve humanity but also provide succour to the persons suffering from physical ailments.

THIS case demonstrates the highly unethical and unscrupulous conduct of the respondents. It is because of such malpractices by the medical profession that it is day-by-day getting disrupted. Mere complaint of pain in the right chest landed the complainant in the hospital of the O.Ps. He was subjected to a large number of ECG tests. His condition though improved on the first day but he was kept in the hospital for ulterior motive to extract money by putting him and his son and family members under the pall of constant fear of having suffered severe heart attack whereas heart function was normal and without any problem. He was administered injections and given unnecessary medicines and that too with dubious design and ill intentions of making money. Through this complaint, the complainant has claimed compensation of Rs. 9,76,000/- towards various heads arising out of medical negligence on the part of the opposite parties. Allegations giving rise to this complaint, in brief, are as under:

On 15.9.1992 the complainant had developed a chest pain in the right side. Immediately thereafter his son took him to the nearest hospital of O.P. No. 1. On examining the complainant the O.P. No. 2-doctor informed the complainant''s son that his father had suffered a heart attack and there is a danger to his life if he was not admitted immediately and given proper treatment. He was so frightened by the advice of the said doctor that he could not afford to consult any other doctor and admitted the complainant in the hospital by depositing fee of Rs. 1,000/-. He was kept in the ICCU for 24 hours and was charged @ 750/- per hour and in all he paid Rs. 18,000/- for which no receipt was issued. Soon thereafter a list of medicines was handed over which were available with the O.P.''s drug store. He was given a cash memo of Rs. 1,560/- on the very first day i.e., 15.9.1982. However, he was discharged on 23.9.1992.

THOUGH O.P. No. 2-doctor told the son of the complainant that complainant was improving but at the same time kept on frightening him by saying that there was still danger to his life as the attack was very severe. THOUGH his condition improved on the day he was admitted but the O.P. never let him go home by telling that there was danger to his life. They subjected him to painful injections and drugs which were having hazardous side effects and the O.P. charged exorbitant amount of Rs. 34,000/- without any breakup and receipts. Affidavit of the complainant shows that he paid Rs. 76,000/- in all to the O.Ps. including cost of medicines, etc. On 21.10.1992 the complainant got himself examined from Dr. Deepak Natarajan, Senior Cardiologist and Head of the Department of Cardiology, Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. He was informed that he had no cardiac problem at all and that he could not have had any cardiac problem in the near past.

BOTH the O.Ps. were preceded ex parte as all possible efforts to serve them failed. In support of the allegations the complainant has produced and proved the following documents: (i) Receipts in the form of Annexures A, B and C showing medical charges charged by the O.P. (ii) Cash memos showing the charges of medicines prescribed by the O.P. and purchased from the Drugs Store of the O.Ps. (iii) Prescription slips of O.P. No. 2-doctor. (iv) Number of ECG tests conducted upon the complainant. In addition to above a second observation made by Dr. Deepak Natarajan of Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital is most significant and is reproduced below: Segmental Wall Motion Normal Eco-cardiography report showed the condition of the complainant being normal. Heart function being normal and there is no problem of heart whatsoever.

THE report of Dr. Natarajan did not suggest that the complainant had ever suffered from any heart problem or heart attack. All cardinal functions were normal. Here was a person whose condition was normal but was put in the hospital unneccessarily for 10-15 days and administered unnecessary drugs, medicines and was diagnosed as a patient who had suffered severe heart attack.

ONE can imagine the fate of a patient like the one who had gone for treatment for a minor problem was put in a fear of losing his life because of having been diagnosed as having suffered a heart attack. Huge amount of Rs. 76,000/- was charged whereas he should have been discharged on the same day when his condition became normal. The conduct of the O.Ps./respondents not only amounts to unfair trade practice as defined under Section 2(1)(r) of Consumer Protection Act, as they made a false and misleading representation concerning the disease and the medical service provided to the complainant, but also deficiency in service as defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Act, which means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service. The mental agony the patient and his family members suffered is unfathomable where a patient is diagnosed to have suffered severe heart attack whereas he only had a minor problem of chest pain, which was relieved immediately on injection. The conduct of the O.Ps. was not only highly detestable but unpardonable also. Such tendencies have to be curbed with heavy hands by compensating the victim adequately as a deterrent.

In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case we allow the complaint and direct the O.Ps. to pay a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) which shall include all the expenses incurred by the complainant as well as the cost of litigation.

THE aforesaid amount shall be paid within two months. Complaint is disposed of in above terms.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room. Complaint disposed of.