The state consumer dispute redressal commission has penalised Hinduja hospital and one of its doctors for failing to provide promised services to a patient, who had undergone a knee-joint replacement surgery there in 1996.
The commission slapped a fine of Rs18.08 lakh on the hospital and its doctor and asked them to pay the amount with nine per cent interest. They have also been fined Rs50,000 towards the complainant's litigation cost.
According to the complainant Veera Kotwal, the hospital and the doctor who had performed her surgery had promised her that a follow-up will be done post-operation. However, the doctor failed to do so, she alleged, adding that after the surgery she started having problems in her knee. When Kotwal complained about it, the doctor concerned allegedly sent his junior to provide the required treatment, but Kotwal's problem persisted.
She then realised that the surgery had not been successful and, hence, she got a revision surgery done in the US.
Aggrieved by the attitude of the hospital and its doctor, she filed a complaint against them before the consumer commission.
The commission, after going through the evidence, asked the hospital and doctor to file their replies. "The hospital services work on non-profit basis and the aim is to render effective medical care to all... It is a reputed institute having tertiary care with postgraduate studies. The hospital has a panel of eminent doctors of faculties of medicine. Complicated issues raised in the consumer complaint ought not to be adjudged and decided under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as it involves complication question of the factual, expert, medical and legal issues. The complainant, without approaching the patient relation department to resolve the problem, knocked on the door of the state commission with pre-determined and pre-conceived notions. The hospital has observed a very liberal open-door policy with respect to work of the patient relation department. Consumer complaint is based on presumptions and conjectures without any cogent and valid documents or opinion. No specific allegations of omission or commission on part of the hospital while attending the patient are agitated," the hospital said in its reply.
The commission, however, held the hospital and doctor failed to provide the services they had promised to the patient, and hence, fined them.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}