Pinaki Ranjan Chatterjee vs Srikumar Chandra

THE complainant Chatterjee''s wife Ms. Mousami (hereinafter called as "patient") undergone caesarean operation (C -section) in the OP -2 hospital i.e. M.C. Dutta Memorial Hospital. It was performed by OP -1 Dr. Srikumar Chandra on 15.01.2004. During post -operative period, on 17.01.2004, patient noticed abdominal distention, which was released by complete douche given by OP -1 on 18.01.2004, but patient did not get any relief. The patient was discharged on 21.01.2004, but again readmitted in OP -2 on 29.01.2004 with further complications. The OP -1 could not find the reasons of complications, hence, referred her to Dr. A.K. Roy and thereafter, on 02.02.2004 patient got admitted to Apollo Gleneagles Hospital under observation of Dr. Bhaskar Pal. There, she was diagnosed as septicaemia with multi organ failure (MOF). During course of treatment, the patient expired on 21.02.2004 and cause of death given was "cardio pulmonary arrest, in this case septicaemia with MOF due to faecal peritonitis". Therefore, alleging negligence, the complainant filed complaint in District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Birbum (Suri) on 07.04.2004 and prayed for total compensation of Rs. 14 lacs.

THE District Forum allowed the complaint and awarded Rs. 4 lacs towards medical costs and Rs. 8 lacs towards compensation for loss of life of his wife and mental agony.

AGGRIEVED by the order of the District Forum, on 30.05.2008, the OP -1 preferred first appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal. The State Commission allowed the appeal vide impugned order dated 17.12.2008. Therefore, aggrieved by the impugned order, the complainant preferred this revision petition. We have heard the counsel for parties. Delay of one day in filing this revision petition is condoned. The counsel for complainant vehemently argued that the District Forum''s findings are correct. He has narrated the sequence of events from the admission of the patient to OP hospital, for the delivery on 15.01.2004 till discharge on 22.01.2004. He submitted that normally an experienced doctor will take only 20 -30 minutes whereas, OP performed C -section for more than two hours. The child was delivered and handed over to the complainant, but the mother/patient was kept in the operation theatre for more than two hours without disclosing any reasons. The patient was discharged without complete cure. The OP intentionally mentioned that patient was fit for discharge. Thereafter, the patient was readmitted with abdominal distention.

THE counsel brought our attention towards evidence of PW -1, PW -2 and PW -3 and also the CT scan report dated 03.02.2004 showed large collection in right side of abdomen involving right lumber region and hypochondria with leakage of oral contrast seen from intestine. The impression was suspected intestinal leak with fecal peritonitis. Decision taken for Exploratory Laparotomy, PW -3 was present and assisted Dr. J. Bhadra Roy during exploratory Labarotomy. There was large collection of about four litres of feculent pus in RIF along right paracolic gutter. Bowel adhesions were dissected by finger. Near complete transaction of ileum was found in two sites about one -inch apart (about 2 feet proximal to ilea caudal junction).

THE counsel vehemently stressed that, due to negligence of OP, there was cut in intestine and the patient subsequently suffered till her death after 22 days. He also pointed out that the OPs adduced Dr.Gouri Shakar Dey as an Expert, who neither treated said patient Mousami nor he has gone through the records of Apollo Gleneagles Hospitals. Whereas, Dr. S. Chandra (OP -1) is claiming himself as an expert in gynaecology, does it not suggest that there was something wrong done by him the caesarean section.

THE counsel for OP Mr. Patajoshi argued the matter. He brought our attention to the medical records filed. As per medical records of Dr. N.C. Dutta Memorial Hospital, under heading of "OT Essentials" it is noted that the on 15.01.2004 OT started at 09.05 p.m. and OT off at 9.58 pm, healthy male child was delivered at 9.11 p.m. We have perused the clinical and follow -up notes maintained by the OP hospital from 15.01.2004 to 21.01.2004. It clearly goes to show that The abdomen was soft, IPS+, the patient was on proper medication and on IV fluids. Thus, the patient was doing well till the time of discharge. Patient has passed stools also. Thereafter, patient was discharged on 22.01.2004, after removing of all stitches.

IT is very important to note that,the patient was admitted again on 29.01.2004. There was distention of abdomen, pulse was 100 per minute, the patient was transfused two units of Packed RBCs, USG was performed, which showed small collection of fluid in POD. The abdomen was distended but, stool passed and laparotomy was advised, but at 1.15 p.m. on 02.02.2004, the patient desired to shift to Calcutta.

IT is very important to decide whether the patient had perforation at the time of C -section? And whether patient can sustain it for more than 10 days? In this context, we have perused the scientific and medical literature. Accordingly, after massive perforation within 3 -6 hours there will be pain, tenderness and rigidity to the patient, there will be high pulse and temperature, the bowels sounds will absent. Thus, it was impossible in this case to explain that, patient''s C -section took place on 15th January, she was comfortable till discharge i.e. up to 22nd, thereafter on 2nd February i.e. after 21 days she approached OP with the sings of perforation. Therefore, we are of considered view that, the perforation was neither occurred during C -section nor during hospital stay. We do not find any negligence on the part of OPs.

THEREFORE , on the entirety there is no merit in these revisions, hence dismissed. However, there will not be any cost.