AICL Cases 2014

No negligence if the standard protocol of medical practice is followed.


Facts:

The deceased wife of original complainant was diagnosed a case of gall stone by the alleged OP’s 1 and 2 doctors (AICL member) and hence was operated by OP’s on 13.12.2009. It was alleged that the surgery was not successful and OPs failed to stitches of gall bladder properly resulting in leakage and the condition of the patient deteriorated, leading to infection and death on 22.01.2010. Complainant filed a consumer case with DCF, alleging negligence on part of the doctor and further alleged that the OPs were neither competent to operate nor have a requisite degree. The learned court held allowed the complaint against the OPs and directed OPs to pay Rs. 3 lakhs as consolidated compensation.
The first appeal was filed before the state commission but the same was dismissed.
The competent counsel of AICL filed a revision petition before the National Commission.
Version of OP’s:
The OPs vehemently denied the allegations and stated that Cholesytectomy was performed by the OP doctor in OP hospital, thenafter the gall bladder specimen, was sent to Histopathological examination (HPE), the report dated 15.12.2009 stated a case of adenocarcinoma (Cancer). Henceforth the deceased patient was sent referred to the cancer hospital, Bikaner for further management.
Held: The learned court allowed the revision petition and stated that the OPs are qualified doctors, the surgery was a complicated one and the gall bladder was adherent. The report of the medical board PGI Chandigarh does not support the complainant’s allegations and does not find any suggestive negligence in treatment.
The report dated 15.12.2009 stated cancer and the patient was referred for further management, there was no delay in reference. The death of the patient was neither due to the wrong surgery nor due to delay in reference. The condition of the patient deteriorated as she developed malignant ascites. Further, as per the medical literature, the prognosis was extremely poor and had very remote chances for survival for 1 or 2 months. The standard medical practice was adopted and no negligence.