Mumbai: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has, after 12 years, given justice to a person who had lost his mobility following medical negligence. The commission has directed the doctor as well as the hospital, who were responsible for this botched up surgery to jointly pay a fine of Rs 5 lakhs to the victim.
The Commission while passing the order also held that such kinds of failures do not align with what a reasonable medical professional would do in similar circumstances.
The case dates back to 2012, when the complainant Tulsiram Bhangre, had sought consultation with Dr. Vivek Kokne, attached with Christanand Charitable Trust Hospital, Chandrapur, for removal of a tumour in his thigh which was hampering his movement. Bhangre said he was assured that post the surgery he would regain his proper mobility.
Accordingly, on August 8, 2012, the doctors had taken him for an operation. However Dr. Kokne negligently severed a six cm sciatic nerve, the primary nerve of the left leg. This resulted in the loss of sensation and mobility in his leg and he was unable to walk unaided.
Bhangre had to undergo another surgery to repair the severed nerve, incurring Rs.3,75,000 for tests, medicines, and hospital fees, and Rs.4,25,000 for the second operation. Bhangre, thus had approached the District consumer forum in 2013, seeking compensation.
The doctor and the hospital in its reply stated that, the severing of the nerve was to prevent danger to his life, thus following the principle of "life over limb" in medical jurisprudence, prioritising the patient's life over a particular body part and denied the allegations of any medical negligence.
The District consumer forum had rejected the claim, thus the complainant approached the State consumer forum, which had held the doctor and the hospital responsible for the negligence. The same was challenged by the doctor and the hospital before the national commission.
The commission after going through the case upheld the State commission’s decision and held the duo guilty of negligence. The Commission held that the duo are responsible for “deficiency in service in not taking consent for removal of sciatica nerve..... not recording its removal in post operation notes, not notifying the Complainant even thereafter and not giving him the requisite counselling as part of discharge notes, mental agony and harassment, loss of income and litigation costs."
