Delayed and botched C-section delivery causing fracture in baby's right arm costed Rs.10 lakhs to the Doctor.: Adv. ROHiT ERNADE. ©

 Delayed and botched C-section delivery causing fracture in baby's right arm costed Rs.10 lakhs to the Doctor.

The hospital Committee Report was relied upon by the Court and it was held that "Due to  forced delivery, head of the child might have fastened at the bottom of the uterus."

"The complainant might be under delusion of Anesthesia on the day of delivery and hence she did not observe the fracture on that day itself."

Adv. ROHiT ERNADE. ©

REVISION PETITION NO. 3085 OF 2014

(Against the Order dated 21/04/2014 in Appeal No. 1831/2013 of the State Commission Karnataka)

DR. ASHWINI M.S, Shimoga, Karnataka V/s. MALINI A.N.

BEFORE:  

  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA,PRESIDING MEMBER

judgment Link :

http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FRP%2F3085%2F2014&dtofhearing=2022-09-13

Factual Matrix in short :

1.      The Respondent - Original complainant Malini A.N  filed Consumer Complaint No. 384 of 2012, claiming compensation of Rs.10 lacs, for alleged medical negligence committed by the petitioner at the time of her caesarean delivery on 02.04.2012, in Mc.Gann Hospital Shimoga,  as a fracture was caused in right arm of new born baby. 

2. That the complainant experienced labour pain and went to the Hospital Shimoga on 02.04.2012 at 10:30 hours , where she was examined as an OPD patient by one Dr. Shobha U.N. (opposite party-2)& thereafter, a nursing student present there also examined her.

3. It is further contended that due to unbearable labour pains, she requested for a room, but as no room was available,  she was asked to walk in corridor, where a bed was arranged. Thereafter complainant met  Dr. Ashwini M.S.  who after examining patient's medical papers, asked her to obtain a scan report from Malnad Diagnostic Centre, which was outside the hospital. 

4. In spite of severe pain, the complainant obtained scanning report and  Dr. Ashwini M.S.,  after examining it, advised to caesarean delivery immediately. The complainant signed the consent form for caesarean delivery. But Anesthetist was not available at that time as such, the complainant was taken to labour ward and attempt was made for normal delivery, which failed. 

5. At about 4:10 PM, after informed consent taken, C-Section delivery was performed. After delivery of the child, the family members were informed that mother and child both were healthy. After some time, they were shifted to the ward. 

6. On the next day,  swelling was noticed in baby's right hand and Doctor on round advised for X-ray. On X-ray, it was found that bone of right hand was broken. Thereafter, treatment of the child was started. The mother and bay stayed for more 4 days in the Hospital and the Complainant filed a case of medical negligence against the Doctors. 

Defense :

1.      The petitioner in its defense denied all the allegations and contended that  the complaint was not maintainable as the service has been provided to the complainant by the government hospital, free of charge. 

2. It was stated that the patient on examination and on scanning report was advised for C-Section as the baby was healthy and normal delivery did not appear probable. The relatives of the complainant delayed, signing the consent form for caesarean delivery. 

3. At about 4:10 PM, signature on the consent form for caesarean delivery was obtained from the relatives of the complainant and thereafter, surgery for delivery was performed. The baby did not sustain any injury at the time of caesarean delivery. 

4. After delivery, the mother and baby were found in good condition. However, the complainant was advised to show the baby to pediatrician and she made a noting in this respect in the case sheet. Opposite party-1 visited the ward in night round on 02.04.2012 and found that mother and baby were in good sleep. 

6.      The District Consumer Forum, by its judgment dated 23.11.2013, held that the complaint was maintainable in view of judgment of Supreme Court in Indian Medical Association Vs. V.P. Shantha, AIR 1996 SC 550. it was also held that in the Hospital Inquiry Report dated 07.07.2012, the negligence of opposite party-1 at the time of caesarean delivery was found proved.  On these findings, the complaint was partly allowed and opposite party-1 was directed to pay Rs.50000/- as the compensation and Rs.3000/- as the cost. The petitioner filed Appeal No.1831 of 2014, from the aforesaid order. State Commission, vide judgment dated 21.04.2014, dismissed the appeal, holding that from evidence on record, negligence on the part of opposite party-1 was proved. Hence this revision has been filed by opposite party-1. 

HELD by NCDRC :

1. The NCDRC relied upon the  Final Investigation Report of the Hospital dated 07.07.2012, statements of the doctors and the nurses attending the patient from the time of her coming to hospital till her caesarean delivery were recorded. 

2. It has held that on the basis of these evidences, it has been found that at the time of surgery, head of the child was dropped at the bottom of uterus, which was a difficult delivery and there was possibility of the bone of child’s hand could be fractured at the time of its bringing out. 

3. The further facts put together prove that that Dr. Ashwini M.S., examined the patient her at 1:30 pm, but the Anaesthetist was not available at that time as such, she was taken to labour ward and attempt was made for normal delivery, which failed. It was held that at about 4:10 PM, signature on the consent form for caesarean delivery was again obtained from her parent and thereafter, surgery for delivery was performed. 

4. It has held that due to  forced delivery, head of the child might have fastened at the bottom of the uterus. The petitioner was required to handle the case more carefully as she had attended the patient at all the relevant time and every fact was in her knowledge but she committed negligence and due to her negligence, the fracture was caused in right hand of the child. 

5. It has been observed that The complainant might be under delusion of anaesthesia on 02.04.2012. If on that day, she could not notice the fracture in the hand of the child, then it was normal for her. 

6. It has also held that the review report does not record any reason for reviewing the previous report. 

The important judgment as it is a known (dis)belief that C-Section are preferred over normal delivery due to monetary reasons. Actually, the choice should be of Doctors to decide the mode of Delivery. 

Many Oby-gyn practitioners say that the patients are not ready to go through the pain of normal delivery and they themselves prefer C-Section. 

In this case, the Hospital Review committee report was against the Doctors. Thus, Drs. have to be very careful as at times you are on your own ! It's strange that how the hospital ha snot been held liable to pay for Doctor's negligence as it is held as per principle of vicarious liability. 

thanks and regards

Adv. ROHiT ERANDE

Pune. ©