SALINDER @ SURENDER vs VIJAY GUPTA

COMPLAINANT Salinder @ Surender has come up in appeal against the order dated 10.10.1997 passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Kamal, where by his complaint alleging deficiency in service against Dr. Vijay Gupta, M.D. Orthopaedics Surgeon of Karnal, has been dismissed as the complainant had failed to establish any deficiency in the rendering of medical service by the respondent Dr. Vijay Gupta.

ACCORDING to the complainant, on 10.8.1995 while driving a scooter he suffered an accident in which his left ankle and leg got entangled between the scooter and a Kikkar tree. He was shifted from his village to the clinic of Dr. Vijay Gupta where he remained admitted for a couple of days and was discharged on 12.8.1995. Later on he was shifted to the clinic of Dr. Pradeep Kohli at Jagadhari on 18.10.1995. ACCORDING to him. Dr. Vijay Gupta was negligent in treating him as he did not exercise proper skill and competence while treating him and discharged him from his clinic in an unsatisfactory condition. Feeling aggrieved against this, the complainant claimed compensation amounting to rupees two lacs for physical pain, mental torture etc. Since Dr. Vijay Gupta was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company at Karnal, the complainant also impleaded the Insurance Company as opposite party No. 2. In his written reply. Dr. Vijay Gupta pleaded that he was M.D. Orthopaedics and had 20 years'' experience in Government Hospitals and was a consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon of repute and eminence. It was also claimed that he was handling all major orthopaedic procedures and had rich experience in the line while running his clinic which was equipped with the most modern and latest equipment. On merits, it was further pleaded that he had exercised due skill and competence while treating the complainant and that there was no fault or deficiency in service on his part. Finally, it was also pleaded that complications like infection and exposure of bone in such cases of crush injury/fracture etc. generally occur and that could not be attributed as deficiency in service or negligence on the part of the doctor.

The complainant in support of his allegations made in the complaint produced certain documents showing the expenses and the bills of the clinic of Dr. Vijay Gupta and Dr. Pradeep Kohli. He also placed on record a certificate given by Dr. S.K. Moda, Former Professor & Head of the Department of Orthopaedics, Medical College, Rohtak, and also examined Dr. Pradeep Kohli as his witness. Dr. Pradeep Kohli while appearing on behalf of the complainant admitted in his cross-examination that the treatment given by Dr. Vijay Gupta was the same which is generally given in the case of compound fractures and crush injuries and was the best known to the medical science. No doubt, other treatments were also available but the one given to the complainant was the best one. The certificate given by Dr. S.K. Moda also supported the observations made by Dr. Pradeep Kohli.

THE learned District Consumer Forum, after considering the evidence on record and after examining the matter in detail, came to the conclusion that the complainant had failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of Dr. Vijay Gupta. Consequently, the complaint was dismissed by a detailed order running into a dozen pages. In the appeal before us, we have gone through the evidence on record. It has been contended by the complainant that instead of dismissing the complaint, the District Consumer Forum should have concluded deficiency in rendering medical service coupled with negligence on the part of Dr. Vijay Gupta from the fact that despite exicising out the infected portion of the bone coupled with the non-union of both bones of the left leg and even after the application of ring fixator on the tibia by Dr. Pradeep Kohli later on, the complainant did not achieve the desired results.

AFTER thoroughly perusing the record and the evidence available in the case, we do not find any merit in the appeal. Dr. Vijay Gupta is a known Orthopaedic Surgeon and Consultant in the line having rich experience of more than 20 years. It is proved on record that he is running Orthopaedic Clinic for quite sometime, which is equipped with the most modern and latest medical equipment. It is also established on record from the evidence of Dr. S.K. Moda and Dr. Pradeep Kohli that the treatment given by Dr. Vijay Gupta to the complainant was the best one which is generally given in such like cases of orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that the complainant has failed to establish any deficiency in service on the part of Dr. Vijay Gupta. Consequently, there being no legal infirmity in the detailed and well reasoned order passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, the same is upheld and the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed. __________________