AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
BRIEF Facts of this case: On 19/7/2006 the Complainant consulted Dr. Shajahan Yoosaf Sahib (OP -1) of Al -Shifa Super Specialty Hospital (OP -3) for treatment of piles (Hemorrhoids). On very same day at about 10.30 a.m., OP -1 and OP -2 removed the piles by laser treatment and the Complainant was discharged on the same day, with an advice to take medicines as prescribed and take rest for 2 weeks. Complainant paid total sum of Rs. 13,100/ -. The Complainant took rest for one day at Ernakulam and then went to his native place at Thalassery. On the third day, the Complainant felt acute pain in his anus. The Complainant contacted OP -2, over telephone. He advised him to take ''voveran 50 tablets''. Since there was no relief, the Complainant again contacted the OP -2 and as prescribed by OP -2, voveran injection was taken, but the pain still persisted. On 06.08.2006, the Complainant was admitted at the Indira Gandhi Co -operative Hospital, Thalassery due to severe pain in his anus. Dr. Sunil Kumar (PW2) examined the Complainant and found that the anus had shrunk because of the laser treatment. The doctor prescribed some medicines to heal the wound. He was hospitalized for same complaints from 17/08/2006 to 21/8/2006. Due to rashness and negligence of OP -1 & 2 it resulted in the injury to the anus of the Complainant and suffered loss. Also, the allegation was that the OP -1 did not possess any degree in medicine. The Complainant filed a complaint No. 231/2008 before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (in short, ''District Forum'') seeking a compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/ - from the OPs, with interest and costs.
After hearing and adducing the evidence on record, the District Forum, came to the conclusion that as per evidence of OPs, prior to treatment, informed consent was taken and the patient was explained about advantages of laser treatment over other line of treatment and complications involving cryosurgery. Complainant was treated by laser and radio frequency under spinal anesthesia by the OP -2 with proper skill. The district forum did not find any negligence and deficiency on the part of OPs; hence accordingly the complaint was dismissed.
AGAINST the order of the District Forum, the Complainant preferred an appeal FA164/2012 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram (in short, ''State Commission''). The State Commission heard the Counsel for both the parties and after perusal of records, dismissed the Appeal,
AGGRIEVED by the order of the State Commission, the Complainant filed this Revision Petition.
THE Complainant sent a letter and expressed his inability to travel from Thalassery (Kerala) to Delhi, due to his ill health and since he is a poor man, prayed to decide the Petition in his absence. We have perused the evidence on record and observations made by State Commission. The complainant''s main allegation was that there was medical negligence by OPs in treatment and also they are not qualified. The evidence on record clearly shows that the OP -2 acquired his qualifications as MBBS in 1970 and MS General Surgery 1987 from Kerala; both the degrees are recognized by Medical Council of India (MCI).
IT is seen from complainant''s evidence that he was suffering from hemorrhoids for the past 12 years and about 10 years back, he had undergone cryosurgery at the Santosh Hospital, Thalassery, Kerala. According to him, he was trouble free for 8 years. From 2005, he was suffering again and taking medicines as and when necessary.
THE State Commission observed; The Complainant relied upon the evidence of PW2 the doctor who treated him subsequently when he was admitted in the Indira Gandhi Co -operative Hospital, Thalassery. According to him due to the surgery at the hospital of the OP -3, there was severe infection for the Complainant. He deposed that the patient had not told him on the procedure to which the Complainant was subjected to but he gave medicine to heal that portion. The patient was examined by him 17.08.2006 again and he found that the anus had shrunk. According to him, the surgery ad infection at the hospital of the OP -3 was the reason for the complaints. Then he deposed that the patient told him that laser treatment was given at the OP -3 hospital. He deposed the medical treatment and surgical treatment are usually done in the case of hemorrhoids but it could not be completely cured using medicine. PW2 stated that the diagnosis is septicemia and he admitted that it is a life threatening one. PW2 deposed that after surgery infection may occur to patients. Stricture to anus happens after surgery due to internal splint injury. Due to no other cause stricture would occur. He stated that it is incorrect to say that post -operative infection is due to the negligence of the doctor.
We have referred several medical literature and standard medical books on surgery like Sabiston Textbook of Surgery, Mastery of Surgery by Josef E. Fischer - Volume 1, Maingot''s Abdominal Operations, 12th Edition, and Practice of Surgery for the Colon, Rectum, and Anus, by Philip H. Gordon, Santhat Nivatvongs. In our observation, we found; The term "hemorrhoids" refers to a common condition occurring worldwide. This condition affects both sexes equally, and although seen more commonly in adults and the elderly, it also affects children.
Because hemorrhoids have a complex and controversial etiology, with different degrees or stages and locations of pathology, no single mode of therapy has proven completely effective in the fields of surgery and bio medics.
Laser hemorrhoidectomy is one of the best non -operative (conservative) options which is preferred than, Rubber band ligation, sclerotherapy, infrared photocoagulation, cry -therapy, manual anal dilatation etc. It is for first - and second -degree hemorrhoids and is usually carried out on outpatient basis. The complications are minor, and the cure rates are high Laser hemorrhoid surgery also usually leads to the wound, healing faster.
THEREFORE , we are of considered view that, the OPs are qualified and adopted the treatment as per standards of medical practice. The method of treatment was also one of preferred choice of non -operative method. The complainant''s sufferings were result of infection caused due to his negligence as he did not follow the instructions of doctor. He has not taken rest for 2 weeks, but travelled in train.
WHAT constitutes Medical Negligence is now well established by a plethora of Rulings of the Honorable Supreme Court of India and by several orders of this Commission. In the Bolam''s case (Bolam Vs. friern Hospital Management Committee, (1957)1 WLR 582). The locus classicus of the test for the standard of care in law, required of a doctor, developed from this landmark case. Mr. Justice McNair, in his direction to the jury, said: [a doctor] is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with the practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art ...Putting it the other way round, a man is not negligent, if he is acting in accordance with such a practice, merely because there is a body of opinion who would take a contrary view.
In view of above discussions, we find no illegality or infirmity in order passed by both the fora below, warranting our interference. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed, with no order as to cost.