National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): While considering the instant complaint alleging negligence and serious deficiency in services, filed by the widow of a 62-year-old patient who underwent angioplasty in the Fortis Heart Centre; the Bench of Ram Surat Ram Maurya, J. (Presiding Member) and Bharat Kumar Pandya (Member) pointed out that the Fortis hospital claims to have world class medical services at a high price, however the assigned doctor ignored the condition of the patient’s lungs and started angioplasty, thereby resulting in severe pulmonary edema within half an hour of beginning the procedure leading up to further complications. The Commission noted that due to gross negligence of the assigned doctor in ignoring the lung condition, the patient suffered from permanent brain injury, remained in coma for 1 month, suffered paralysis and went into a vegetative state.
Therefore, the Commission directed the Opposite Parties to pay Rs 65 lakhs to the complainant within 2 months.
Background: In November 2010, when the patient who was suffering from Type 2 Diabetes for 20 years, along with coronary artery disease and hypertension etc., visited Fortis Escorts Heart Centre for a routine check-up, it was discovered after angiography that 2 of arteries were blocked and the 3rd one was ballooning. Considering the reputation of the assigned doctor, the patient decided to undergo angioplasty conducted in Fortis hospital by the assigned doctor (2nd OP) in May 2011.
The patient was shifted to ICU where he was kept under observation for 36 hrs. The complainant was also informed that the patient was being administered Heparin for maintaining the patient’s blood pressure for doing IA Ballooning. It appeared that the patient suffered brain hemorrhage due to Heparin, but the Opposite Parties failed to diagnose it on time and went on giving Heparin. The elder daughter of the complainant, who was also a medical practitioner, suspected brain hemorrhage to the patient and informed the floor doctors and 2nd OP, but they ignored it.
When the patient’s condition became critical, a CT scan was done, and the complainant and family members were told that the patient had suffered from seizure/brain hemorrhage at the time of angioplasty. Fortis Hospital called the neurosurgeon, and another CT scan was done, which showed Hematoma, which required surgery, for which, the patient had to be shifted to the Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj. However, Fortis Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre could not arrange an equipped ambulance timely, and the ambulance was called from the Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj, which took an unusual time. Even after the brain surgery, the patient remained in coma for almost one month. When he came out of coma, he suffered from complete paralysis of left side and lost his ability to speak, hear or understand other people.
Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj was providing only normal nursing care to the patient after surgery, for which, they were charging exorbitantly, therefore, the complainant got the patient discharged in June 2011 and shifted to Dr. RML Hospital, New Delhi, however after discharge in August 2011, the patient was barely able to walk properly with a walking stick.
The complainant alleged that the Opposite Parties administered Heparin despite knowing that the patient was suffering from Type-2 Diabetes, thereby causing brain hemorrhage. Furthermore, the Opposite Parties took 72 hrs to diagnose the hemorrhage, thereby causing inordinate delay in providing treatment for hemorrhage thus resulting in grievous injury to the patient. The complainant further alleged that the patient himself was a medical professional earning Rs 30,000 per month, however after the angioplasty, he could never do his routine work without any help.
The complainant stated that they spent Rs. 50 lakhs on the treatment but suffered mistreatment and negligence from the Opposite Parties at every stage.
Per contra, the Opposite Parties rebutted the allegations and stated that the patient and his elder daughter being doctors themselves, were aware of the risks involved in angioplasty before giving an informed consent
Commission’s assessment: Perusing the facts of the case and medical procedures followed by the Opposite Parties during and after the angioplasty operation, the Commission noted that 2nd OP had ignored the condition of the patient’s lungs despite the patient’s co-morbidities being known. The Commission stated that the Opposite Parties could not shirk their responsibilities by stating that the patient and his daughter were doctors and had given their informed consent.
The Commission further stated that despite the critical condition of the patient, the Opposite Parties took 6 hrs. to shift the patient for neurosurgery.
Relying on Arun Kumar Manglik v. Chirayu Health & Medicare (P) Ltd., (2019) 7 SCC 401, the Commission pointed out that the critical parameters of patient were not evaluated, monitoring blood parameters were not done. Furthermore, it was found by the Medical Council of India that the patient did not receive timely treatment and failed to satisfy the standard of legal care as propounded in Bolam v. Friern Hospital Managment Committee1, which was adopted by Indian Courts.
Therefore, finding that the Opposite Parties had been grossly negligent, the Commission directed them to pay compensation of Rs 65 Lakhs to the complainant.
[X v. Fortis Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre, CC No. 326 of 2012, decided on 7-8-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For complainant: Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Advocate; Mr. Mohit K. Mudgal, Advocate; Mr. Sachin Dubey, Advocate; Mr. Saurabh Kumar, Advocate
For Opposite Parties: Mr. Joy Basu, Sr. Advocate; Mr. Arjun Dewan, Advocate; Mr. Akash Arora, Advocate; Mr. Anoop George, Advocate
