Case nº Consumer Case No. 1376 Of 2016 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Wednesday November 30, 2016 (case Satender Kumar Vs Indraprastha Apollo Hospital and Anr.)
| Judge | For Appellant: Mr. Manoj Kumar Garg, Advocate with Mr. Pranut Sharma, Advocate |
| President | Dr. S.M. Kantikar,Presiding Member |
| Resolution Date | Wednesday November 30, 2016 |
| Issuing Organization | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
1. Brief facts are that the complainant, Shri Satendra Kumar, sustained accidental fall at home on 14.06.2012, suffered fracture of right leg. He was admitted in Indraprastha Apollo Hospital (OP 1). Dr. Raju Vaishya (OP-2) operated him on 14.6.2012, and discharged him on 17.6.2012. Thereafter, in the year 2013, on 23.05.2013 complainant again met with an accident and suffered fracture of left leg. He was taken to OP-1 hospital, operated by OP 2 and discharged on 25.5.2013. It is alleged that complainant never recovered fully after surgery, since two years he is unable to walk freely for a long time. Both the surgeries were not successful. The complainant time and again felt late night pain. The rod inserted in right leg got bent in the year 2014. Therefore, on 9.4.2014, another operation was performed by Dr. U. K. Sadhoo at Saket City Hospital, New Delhi. Old rod from the right leg inserted by OP 1 was taken out and complainant was discharged from Saket City Hospital on 12.4.2014 in the stable condition. Again, since January, 2016, complainant is facing severe problem in left leg during walking even with the help of stick. He consulted OP-2 again and various Orthopaedic surgeons like Dr. Tandon at Apollo Hospital and other at ADIVA Super Specialty Care, but everyone suggested for re-operation of the left leg. On hearing such advice, the complainant broke down and lost the hope of better life. He was again operated in Saket City Hospital on 23.4.2016 by Dr. U. K. Sadhoo. The complainant being Chairman Managing Director of the company "Quadrant Engineering Plastic Products", could not attend any work for four years because of repeated problems in both the legs. It caused great loss to his earning and his reputation in the market. Therefore, alleging medical negligence on the part of OP 1 and 2, also both the opposite parties are making mockery of human life and unlawfully extracted money, the complainant filed this complaint and claimed...
To continue reading
Request your trial