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.© 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency – Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital “Its in the interest of Patients that Doctors. should not be dragged to the Court unnecessarily”” – National Commission observed while dismissing the Compliant for damages of Rs.2.5 Crores as it prevents Doctors from discharging their duty to a suffering person who needs their assistance utmost. A Physician is free to decide whom he will serve, save in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital Case : SUMAN TANEJA V/s. METRO HOSPITAL & HEART INSTITUTE & 3 ORS, decided on 02/02/2016. Factual Matrix in nutshell : 1. The Complainant, widow of deceased patient claimed damages to the tune of Rs. Two & half Crores on the ground that her husband who was diagnosed as Inferior Wall Myocardial Infarction (IWMI).did not receive the emergency treatment in Golden Hours.The Doctor ...
Read more

A "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.-Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.©

 The "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.  Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© a. Non availability of Operation Theatre is not a valid ground to hold Hospital Negligent : b. Non functioning of Machines and Equipments cannot be said to be Negligence. c. It is an incorrect assumption to say that, "since surgery was performed by a doctor, he alone would be responsible for different aspects of the treatment required and given to the patient". d. It is too much to expect from a doctor to remain on the bed side of the patient throughout his stay in the hospital. e. Every death of a patient cannot on the face of it be considered to be medical negligence. f.  In spite of the treatment, if the patient had not survived, the doctors cannot be blamed as even the doctors with the best of their abilities cannot prevent the inevitable g. The doctor cannot be held liable for medical negligence by applying the doctrine of  res ips...
Read more

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section " The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (MSCDRC) in its recent judgment dated 31/03/2017, gave the verdict against the Doctor, but absolved the Hospital.. Case details - Mr.Prashant Tamhane V/s. P.D. hinduja Hospital and anr. CC No.221 of 2003. http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetPdf.do… Facts in short : 1. This is the case of 2002. The wife (since deceased) of the Complainant was admitted in the Hospital after the blood reports revealed symptoms of hepatitis. There she was examined by Dr.Ashit Hegde, the Opponent no.2 Doctor in the present case. At that time he after examining the patient he thought it fit for not admitting the patient. By taking medication she was improving. 2.However after about one month, she had Chest pain and difficulty in breathing. Initial X-ray was normal, but in later X-ray, she was diagno...
Read more