Dismissed : The Case with the allegations that Hysterectomy was performed for making profit and without telling alternative methods of treatment. Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.©

Dismissed : The Case with the allegations that Hysterectomy was performed for making profit and without telling alternative methods of treatment. 

" VVF is a known complication of TAH with BSO  in the background of post LUCS Adhesion" 

Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© 

Case Details : REVISION PETITION NO. 331 OF 2021

 (Against the Order dated 31/12/2019 in Appeal No. 927/2016 of the State Commission West Bengal)

 DINABANDHU ALUNI & ANR. V/s.  DR. ALOKE KUMAR BHUSHAN & 2 ORS.

BEFORE:  

  HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR,PRESIDING MEMBER

Judgment Link : Dated : 30 Sep 2022

http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FRP%2F331%2F2021&dtofhearing=2022-09-30

Facts in short :

1.      The case of the Complainant is that her wife, Smt. Jharna ( the ‘patient’) was operated at SNR Carnival Hospital on 17.01.2013 and suffered post-hysterectomy Vasico Vaginal Fistula (VVF). Therefore, the patient further got operated at CMC, Vellore and incurred huge expenditure. It was further alleged that the Total abdominal hysterectomy  (TAH) was performed without informed consent.

2.       The learned Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the couple approached SNR Carnival Hospital for treatment. There was no definite indication of malignancy in the uterus / ovary of the patient but the Hysterectomy was performed by unnecessarily. The alternative methods of treatment were not told, and without obtaining “Informed Consent” from the couple, the Hysterectomy was performed under RSBY Scheme for making profit, violating the principles of ethics framed by “Medical Council of India” and similar Organizations.

3.       The District Forum sought an opinion of expert from Chief Medical Officer of Health, Nadia at Krishnanagar. The expert committee consisted of four doctors including one Gynaecologist and Obstetrics, one Surgeon, one Physician, which submitted the enquiry report absolving the doctor and Hospital where it has been categorically mentioned –

     “Since the choice of operation by Dr. A.K. Bhusan at Carnival Hospital was justified and post-operative VVF is a known complication of TAH with BSO (Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy) in the background of post LUCS Adhesion, it cannot be concluded, based on the available evidences that VVF resulted from any negligence in operation.

Held :    

1. Relying upon the Hon. apex Court judgments in the case of Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India & Anr (Civil Appeal No. 432 / 2022 Order dated 21.01.2022) & Rubi (Chandra) Dutta Vs. M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd.[2011 11 SCC 269],  The NCDRC declined to interfere in the concurrent findings given by  lower foras by using its Revisional Jurisdiction which is to be exercised sparingly and when there is grave error of law and facts. 

2. It  is observed that , the Enquiry Committee concluded that the treatment given by OP-1 and / or the SNR Carnival Hospital did not show any deviation from standard protocol. The Complainant made just mere averments in the complaint and I do not find by any stretch of imagination proved the negligence by placing cogent evidence. It was necessary for the Complainant to provide the facta probanda as well as facta probantia. In entirety, the opinion of the expert committee establishes the duty of care and reasonable standard of practice from the OPs. 

The Case in hand teaches important lesson to Medicos. Documentation has no alternative. The allegations of profiteering and not explaining alternative modes of treatment are common and for all this, documentation with detailing is important. 

Thanks and Regards,

Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.©