Rs 1 lakh fine slapped on hospital for deficiency in service

Mohali, September 23
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has directed the Grecian Super Speciality Hospital to pay a compensation of Rs 1 lakh to a Chandigarh resident for alleged deficiency in service.
BS Mehandiratta, president of the forum, ordered that the Grecian Hospital and Dr Vinod Nimbran, oncologist, should pay to the complainant a compensation of Rs1 lakh within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If this compensation was not paid within the aforesaid period, it would carry interest thereon at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of institution of the complaint till the date of actual payment. The opposite parties were also asked to pay litigation costs of Rs 5,000. Satwant Kaur, resident of Sector 10, Chandigarh, told the forum that she was diagnosed as a case of breast cancer by the Command Hospital, Chandigarh, and advised mastectomy procedure to be performed at the earliest. She was referred to Grecian Hospital, one of the empanelled hospitals under the Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme (ECHS).
She was advised certain tests but during the process she got the impression that the hospital was allegedly prolonging the time line in order to justify the additional charges. Finally, the surgery was done on September 12, 2009. The complainant , however, got restless and frustrated due to the casual and indecisive behaviour of the doctors and other paramedical staff. A programme for administering her chemotherapy was planned after her discharge.
The complainant further alleged that her first chemotherapy was administered by a nurse without the personal supervision of any doctor amounting to negligence on the part of the hospital. The second cycle was also not carried out in a satisfactory manner.
The complainant alleged that the aforesaid acts of commission and omission on the part of the hospital amounted to deficiency of service. The hospital delayed the action and procedure at every stage, which was sure to have reduced the life span of the complainant and also caused her to bear pain and trauma for removal of her breast.
The opposite parties in their joint written statement have denied the allegations of the complainant. They have stated that in case the complainant was not satisfied with the treatment given by them or with the first cycle of chemotherapy, she could not have visited them again. The fact that she came to them for chemotherapy repeatedly showed that she was satisfied with their treatment. They have denied that at the time of administration of chemotherapy to the complainant, no doctor was present and have stated that Dr Ashutosh Mukharjee, who is MD, radiation oncologist, and was a consultant, had planned and administered the drug in his presence. The husband of the complainant at the time of every discharge filled feed back and satisfactory treatment/investigation certificate form.
The miraculous recovery of the complainant was possible only because of good treatment by the hospital and their doctors. Denying any deficiency of service on their part, the opposite parties have sought dismissal of the complaint.