O.P. No. 6 of 2004. Case: Kokila Samuthiram Vs Malar Hospitals. Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberO.P. No. 6 of 2004
Party NameKokila Samuthiram Vs Malar Hospitals
CounselFor Appellant: S. Senthilnathan, Advocate and For Respondents: Satish Parasaran, Advocate
JudgesR. Regupathi, J. (President), J. Jayaram, Member (J) and P. Bakiyavathi, Member
IssueConsumer Law
CitationIII (2014) CPJ 224
Judgement DateJuly 08, 2014
CourtTamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Order:

J. Jayaram, Member (J)

  1. The case of the complainant is as follows:

    The complainant is the wife of the deceased Su. Samuthiram, a well known Tamil writer who was retired Joint Director, Publicity, Government of India. He met with a road accident on 31.3.2003 at about 12.30 p.m. involving a bus, at Adyar, and he was taken to the nearby opposite party hospital around 12.50 p.m. by the bus driver and the police. The patient/deceased complained of severe pain in his abdomen, but the hospital took their own time to commence treatment and the opposite party demanded huge amount to start treatment and the patient explained to the opposite party that his wife had gone to Bangalore, and their son was in U.S.A. and his daughter was in Gujarat, and that he is a retired officer and he would arrange money soon after the arrival of his relatives and requested the opposite party to start treatment. The doctors and the nurses were not convinced, and they insisted on payment in spite of the patient pleading again and again that money was not a problem for him. On coming to know that the patient met with road accident, his friends visited the hospital and they also requested the opposite party to start the treatment, and her sister who is a village woman reached the hospital at about 4.00 p.m. and she was asked to make payment by the opposite party as a condition precedent to start the treatment and even though some tests were conducted, no proper treatment was given. At about 5.00 p.m., the patient started vomiting blood and at about 7.00 p.m. two Advocates by name Thiru Jinnah and Thiru Paranthaman came to see the patient and on seeing the condition of the patient, they shouted at the doctors for not giving proper and due treatment, and only thereafter i.e. 7.00 p.m., treatment was given to the patient. The patient was complaining of abdominal pain and difficulty in passing urine. The patient's wife/the complainant rushed to the hospital from Bangalore at about 2.30 a.m. in the night and after that the patient was shifted to ICCU at about 3.00 a.m. Consequently, the deficiency in service, careless approach, improper diagnosis of ailment, delay at every stage, irritating demand for money and total lack of interest in the patient, and negligent attitude of the opposite party cost the life of the patient and the patient died at 9.00 a.m. on 1.4.2003. Even though the complainant had given consent for operation, to her knowledge, no operation was done and the doctor informed the complainant that the reason for death was cardiogenic shock, and thereafter postmortem was done at Royapettah Government Hospital. The complainant's husband died only due to the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and hence the opposite party is liable to pay compensation for the same. The complainant issued a lawyer's notice to the opposite party on 10.9.2003 claiming compensation of Rs. 20 lac, but the opposite party did not care to send any reply, and hence the complaint praying for direction to the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 20 Lac as compensation for the loss of her husband, mental agony, loss of love and affection and loss of monetary benefits caused by the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and to pay costs of Rs. 20,000 towards expenses.

    The opposite party filed version stating as follows:

    The complainant's husband met with road accident at about 12.50 p.m. on 31.3.2003, while he was driving his car and he was brought to the opposite party's Casualty ward by the police, and immediately on his arrival he was examined by the casualty Medical Officer, and it was noted that he had severe pain in the right hip and he had no history of difficulty in breathing. Examining the patient and on obtaining information from him, it was evident that he was a known case of diabetes, hypertensive with ischemic heart disease and the abdomen was found to be soft with no tenderness, and active bowl sounds were also heard, thereby evidencing normal intestinal function and externally there were multiple minor uncomplicated lacerations on the face. Immediately X-ray of the pelvis on both the hips and chest X-ray and Ultra Sound Scan of the abdomen were taken in the emergency room itself and the X-ray of the pelvis revealed fractures of the inferior right Pubic Ramus and the Acetabulum and immediately Dr. Nandakumar Sundaram, a leading Ortho Surgeon and his colleague Dr. Prasad examined him...

To continue reading

Request your trial