ORDER :-( PRESIDENT ASHOK KUMAR GARG) The present complaint has been filed U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (amended up to date) by the Complainants against the opposite parties seeking directions to pay compensation of Rs.37.00 lakhs (thirty Seven Lacs) on account of death of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur after delivery of male child due to medical negligent acts/carelessness of opposite parties and to pay Rs. 10,00,000/- as medical expenses incurred on her treatment and also to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension, harassment etc. and Rs.33,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainants.
2. Brief facts, as alleged in the complaint by the complainants are that OPs No.1 & 2 have established and running Community Health Centre at Village Sitto Gunno, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka (OP No.3) for treatment/providing medical services to the General Public. The OPs No.5 to 8 are Staff Nurses, employed at the said Community Health Centre (CHC). The OP No.4 is Administrative head of Community Health Centre (CHC) Sitto Gunno. OPsNo.4 to 8 are paid by OPs No. 1, 2 & 3 for the purpose of providing treatment and Medical services to General Public. It is further alleged that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur wife of complainant No.1 was pregnant and her family members in order to avoid any risk to child and mother, with consultation of one Asha Worker namely Gurmeet Kaur, took her to Govt Civil Hospital (CHC) at Village Sitto Gunno, due to labour pain in the early hours on dated 12.5.2020, where after completion of necessary formalities Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was admitted and at the time of her admission, she was accompanied by relatives namely Ramandeep Kaur, Amandeep Singh, Rashpal Singh and Gurmeet
2
Kaur (Asha Worker). It is further alleged that at the time of admission, OPs No.4 to 8 and other staff of the CHC Sitto Gunno assured the relatives that the services of Gynaecologist or Obstetrician Doctors and other qualified medical personnel are available and best care will be taken of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur. It is further alleged that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur delivered a male child (complainant No.2) at about 10.00 a.m. on the same day i.e. dated 12.5.2020 through normal delivery and it was told that mother and child are well. After the delivery, OPs No.5 to 8, who are mere staff nurses, took care of child and Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur but they were neither competent nor qualified for undertaking such job and Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was not attended by any Gynaecologist or Obstetrician doctor or any other qualified medical personnel. It is further alleged that during the course of delivery, Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur suffered with tear in Cervix, Retained Products of Conception, Post-Partum Haemorrhage (PPH) and contracted infection, however, at CHC Sitto Gunno, no recourse was taken to treat with that conditions of the patient by way of repair of Cervix or controlling the haemorrhage or removal of retained products of conception or treating/ controlling the infection or effecting blood transfusion, due to which, condition of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur deteriorated and to cover up negligent act and to wriggle out of any responsibility, the OPs No.5 to 8 Staff Nurses prepared false records and hushed off Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur to higher centre on the false pretext of getting some tests but she was got admitted in a Pvt. Hospital of Nagpal Nursing Home, at Abohar on the same date i.e. 12.05.2020 at about 07.00 p.m. wherefrom due to acute renal failure and septic shock, Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was referred to the higher Centre on dated 13.05.2020 and she was got admitted at Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot on dated 13.05.2020 where she remained under treatment there till dated 17.05.2020 and Doctors at Faridkot identified cervix tear and repaired the same, twice blood transfusions and thrice haemodialysis were
3
also done there. However, in the light of deteriorating condition of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, she was got admitted in Dayanand Medical College and Hospital Ludhiana, wherein, she remained under treatment from dated 17.05.2020 to 25.06.2020 and the doctors there performed Dilatation and Curettage on Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur and found adherent clots inside the Uterus, Vaginal swabs disclosed growth of Kelbsiella Bacteria. Thereafter on dated 26.06.2020, she was taken to Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGI) Chandigarh, where she died on the same day. A medical certificate showing immediate cause of her death due to Cardio-Pulmmary-avy with antecedent cause being Post-Partum Haemorrhage (PPH) with Sepsis, was issued by the PGI, Chandigarh. It is further alleged that the OP No.3 (CHC Sitto Gunno) did not provide services of Gynaecologist or Obstetrician doctors or other qualified medical personnel for the delivery of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur and taking Post-Partum care and OPs No.4 to 8 made false representation that services of Gynaecologist, Obstetrician and other qualified medical personnel are available and adequate care will be taken of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur. Had the Complainant No.1 or the accompanying relatives known that Gynaecologist/ Obstetrician or other qualified medical personnel are not available at CHC Sitto Gunno, they would not have got Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur admitted there. Further the O.P. No. 5 to 8 made false statements to complainant No.1 and accompanying relatives regarding the post- partum condition (PPH), which denied them opportunity of timely approaching competent doctors for treatment, which lead to complications, renal failure, septicaemia, septic shock, shutting down of organs and finally death of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur. It is further alleged that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was young lady and assisted her husband in his Agriculture operations. Due to her death, the complainants have lost their valuable assistance and have also suffered mental tension, agony, harassment, humiliation in the hands of the OPs. It is further alleged
4
that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur had suffered from system failure of the CHC Sitto Gunno, which constitutes the deficiency in service, for which, the complainants are entitled for the compensation and other relief from the OPs jointly & severally as prayed above. Hence, this complaint.
3. Upon notice, OPs No.1 to 8 appeared through their Advocate and filed joint written statement. Besides some preliminary objections interalia maintainability, jurisdiction, cause of action & locus standie, does not fall under the definition of consumer as no charges were charged rather Smt. Sukhvinder Kaur was treated free of Cost under Scheme of Govt of Punjab, not come to the Commission with clean hands and present complaint has been filed just to extort the money by way of blackmailing, no deficiency in service, complainants are barred by own act & conduct, complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties as the OPs No.1 to 4 i.e. OP No.1 State of Punjab through Collector, Fazilka, OP No.2, M.D., Punjab Health System Corporation Punjab, OP No.3 & 4 Dr. Ravi Bansal as SMO, CHC Sitto Gunno (whose duty was elsewhere on that date due to spread of CORONA VIRUS) have no concern with this complaint and on merit, it has been submitted that as per record, on dated 12.05.2020 Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was found present in front of Labour room at about 04.40 a.m. in early hours when Smt. Harjit Kaur was on round of Hospital along with staff Nurse namely Manju. It is further submitted that no question arises of any assurance by the OPs as alleged in the complaint, as due to severe shortage of staff as well as State Govt. has not posted any Gyne / Obst. or lady doctors during the said period at CHC Sitto Gunno, however, every visiting patient is always dealt with due care, responsibility and compassionately. It is further submitted that as per record, Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was examined by OPs No.5 & 6 Staff Nurse Manju whereas all kind of baby care work given by the OP No.7 Mamta staff Nurse. Smt. Harjit Kaur staff Nurse, OP
5
No.5 is very experienced staff Nurse who is performing her duties honestly since January 2007 and has vast experience of conducting more than 1000 deliveries. It is further submitted that it was clearly told that though there one Surgeon (OP No.4) is posted but the Govt. was getting his services under Covid-19 at CHC, Village Ramsara. On dated 12/5/2020, at about 09.56 A.M. the delivery took place which was normal. Before delivery patient was given enema and after getting gut evacuation patient was taken to the Labour Room. The placenta was delivered ensituviginal care was given and no surgical intervention was done during entire course of delivery. There was no complication observed or felt by the patient herself. It has been specifically denied that there was tear in cervix and product of conception retained and similarly there was no sign of Post Partum Haemorrhage (PPH) and contracted infection in the CHC of OPs. There was no need of any kind of surgical intervention /repair of cervix or controlling haemorrhage or removal of any alleged retained product conception or for treatment or controlling the infection or effecting blood transfusion as per record. However, after shifting the patient to ward, the patient complained of lower pain abdomen and bleeding per vagina at about 02.15 p.m. The OP No.5 through OP No.6, consulted with OP No.4 Doctor on Mobile phone who was performing his duties at CHC Ramsara due to Covid-19 and as per his advice, first line treatment was given and patient was advised and referred to Civil Hospital, Abohar instead of to Nagpal Nursing Home as alleged in the complaint as OPs have nothing to do with the alleged Nursing Home. The attendants might have taken the patients out of their own sweet will and against medical advice somewhere else other than Civil Hospital, Abohar as referred. It is further submitted that the OPs do not know about any kind of treatment as alleged or finding of any adherent clots inside the uterus, vaginal swabs or any growth of Kelbsiella bacteria. Though the OPs have sympathy towards the complainants but the alleged death has
6
not occurred due to any lapse or medical negligence and services provided free of cost by the OPs. Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was immediately attended and treated as per as per Govt. guidelines even in Covid-19 days. The OPs themselves cannot post any Medical Officer and the Govt. too has to do it after a long process of selection and appointment procedure as it is always domain of Govt. to post or not to post any Medical Officer. Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Staff Nurse OP No.8 was/is performing duties since 2019 under National Health Mission (NPCDSCS) for prevention and control of Cancer, diabetes, Cardio Cardiovascular Disease and stroke, yet she completed the file on the instructions of senior staff Nurses only to save time. The OP No.7 gave baby care only, who weighed 3.50 Kg and was normal. So, OPs No.7 & 8 did not assist in the delivery.
4. It is further submitted that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was treated free of cost under JSSK Scheme around 05:00 a.m., therefore, complainant does not fall under the definition of consumer and this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain & try the present complaint. Rest contents of the complaint have been denied being wrong, incorrect, complicated one and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint as there was no deficiency in service or medical negligence on the part of OPs.
5. In support of his case, complainant No.1 Amandeep Singh tendered into evidence his Affidavit as Ex.C1, Copies of documents i.e. Medical record of CHC, Sitto Gunno, Medical record of Nagpal Nursing Home, Abohar, Medical record of GGS, Medical College & Hospital, Faridkot, Medical record of DMC, Ludhiana, Medical Certificate of cause of death of Sukhwinder Kaur as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6, bills & other hospital treatment record /documents as Ex.C-7 to Ex.C-413. Besides this, complainant examined Dr. Simran Kaur, DMC Ludhiana as CW-1, who tendered into evidence treatment record as Ex.C-415 to Ex.C-417 and also examined Dr. Sumit Kumar, Faridkot as CW-2, who tendered into evidence Photocopies of
7
treatment/hospital record as Ex.C-414. Dr. Sunil Kumar Juneja, DMC Ludhiana was also examined as CW-3, who tendered the documents/record as Ex.OP-1/1 to Ex.OP- 1/4. Dr. Latika Nagpal, Nagpal Hospital, Abohar was also examined as CW-4, who has proved reference slip already exhibited as Ex.C-3. Thereafter, complainant tendered into evidence his Affidavit as Ex.CW-1/A, and Photocopies of documents i.e. LRs application as Ex.C-418 with report of Tehsildar as Ex.C-419 and closed the evidence on behalf of all the complainants.
6. On the other hand, on behalf of OPs, Dr. Ravi Bansal, M.O, CHC Sitto Gunno, appeared as OPW-1 and tendered into evidence his Affidavit as Ex.OP-1, Photocopies of documents i.e. officials letters dated 02.02.2021, 02.02.2021, 03.02.2021, 04.02.2021 as Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-5, office order as Ex.OP-6, service book of OP No.4 as Ex.OP-7, letter dated 06.05.2020 as Ex.OP-8, office order dated 11.05.2020 as Ex.OP-9, letter dated 19.01.2021 as Ex.OP-10, self-declaration as Ex.OP-11, letter No.RS/21-04 as Ex.OP-12, MAP as Ex.OP-13, list of patients as Ex.OP-14, record of patients as Ex.OP-15, car log book as Ex.OP-16, list of patients as Ex.OP-17, letter as Ex.OP-18, letter dated 01.02.2021 as Ex.OP-19, letter dated 20.10.2020 as Ex.OP-20, Affidavit of Dr. Manjit Singh as Ex.OP-21, Photocopy of record of Covid patients as Ex.C-22. Besides this, on behalf of OP No.5,Ms. Harjit Kaur appeared asOPW-2 and tendered into evidence her Affidavit as Ex.OP-23 and Photocopies of documents i.e. office order as Ex.OP-24, Affidavit as Ex.OP-25, nursing registration certificate as Ex.OP-26, notification dated 07.12.2018 as Ex.OP- 27, duty roaster as Ex.OP-28, orders dated 16.09.2013 as Ex.OP-29, emergency patient record register as Ex.OP-30, OPD slip as Ex.OP-31, indoor register as Ex.OP32, original photographs as Ex.OP-33 & Ex.OP-33/A. On behalf of OP No.6, Ms. Manju appeared as OPW-3 and tendered into evidence her Affidavit as Ex.OP- 34, Photocopies of documents i.e. joining application dated 04.02.2008 as Ex.OP-35,
8
certificate as Ex.OP-36, notification dated 07.12.2018 as Ex.OP-37, duty roaster as Ex.OP-38, order dated 16.09.2013 as Ex.OP-39, indoor register as Ex.OP-40, admission form as Ex.OP-41, delivery calculations as Ex.OP-42.On behalf of OP No.7, Ms. Mamta appeared as OPW-4 and tendered into evidence her Affidavit as Ex.OP43, Photocopies of documents i.e. appointment letter as Ex.OP44, joining application as Ex.OP45, registration certificate as Ex.OP46, notification as Ex.OP47, duty roaster as Ex.OP48, order dated 16.09.2013 as Ex.OP49, child vaccination register as Ex.OP50, NPCDCS register as Ex.OP51, case sheets as Ex.OP52 & Ex.OP53. On behalf of OP No.8, Ms. Amandeep Kaur appeared as OPW-5 and tendered into evidence her Affidavit as Ex.OP-54, Photocopies of documents i.e. appointment letter as Ex.OP55, joining application as Ex.OP-56, diploma certificate as Ex.OP-57, notification as Ex.OP-58, duty roaster as Ex.OP59, order dated 16.09.2013 as Ex.OP-60, case sheet as Ex.OP61, treatment card as Ex.OP-62 to Ex.OP-64. Thereafter, OPs examined Sh. Ravi Kumar, Record Keeper as OPW-6, who tendered into evidence attested copies of, relevant page of register May 2020 of CHC Sitto Gunno as Ex.OPw6/A, relevant page of register May 2020 of CHC Ramsara as Ex.OPw6/B. Thereafter, Ld. Counsel for OPs tendered into evidence attested copies of, notification No.MD/NRHM/PB/09/8297-8316 dated 25.08.2009 as Ex.OPx1, reply dated 18.01.2019 of RTI application as Ex.OPx2 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.
7. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings, documents placed on file very carefully and minutely. No written arguments on behalf of either of the parties have been filed and Ld. Counsels requested to decide the complaint on merit.
8. Ld. Counsel for complainant reiterated all the facts mentioned in the complaint, contents of which are supported with the Affidavit of Complainant (Ex.C-
9
1) and argued that it was not disclosed by the OPs No.5 to 8, who were mere staff nurses that no Gynaecologist/ Obstetrician doctors were posted there and during the course of delivery, Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur suffered tear in Cervix, Retained Products of Conception, Post-Partum Haemorrhage (PPH) and contracted infection, however, at CHC Sitto Gunno, no recourse was taken to treat with that conditions of the patient by way of repair of Cervix or controlling the haemorrhage or removal of retained products of conception or treating/ controlling the infection or effecting blood transfusion, due to which, condition of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur deteriorated and to cover up their negligent act and to wriggle out of any responsibility, the OPs No.5 to 8 prepared false records and referred her to another hospital. Ld. Counsel for the complainant further argued that thereafter Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was admitted at Nagpal Nursing Home Abohar at about 07.00 p.m. on the same day dated 12.05.2020, wherefrom due to acute renal failure and septic shock, she was referred to the higher Centre on dated 13.05.2020 and she was got admitted at GGS Medical College, Faridkot and remained under treatment there till dated 17.05.2020 and the Doctors identified cervix tear and repaired the same, twice blood transfusions and thrice haemodialysis were also done there, however, due to deteriorating condition, she was got admitted in DMC, Ludhiana, wherein, she remained under treatment from dated 17.05.2020 to 25.06.2020 and the doctors there performed Dilatation and Curettage and found adherent clots inside the Uterus, Vaginal swabs disclosed growth of Kelbsiella Bacteria and thereafter she was taken to PGI, Chandigarh on dated 26.06.2020 where Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur died on the same day and referred the certificate showing immediate cause of her death due to Cardio-Pulmmary-avy with antecedent cause being Post-Partum Haemorrhage (PPH) with Sepsis issued by the PGI, Chandigarh as Ex.C-6. Ld. Counsel for the complainant also referred the record of CHC Sitto Gunno, Nagpal Hospital, Abohar, GGS Medical College, Faridkot,
10
DMC Ludhiana & PGI Chandigarh and medical bills placed on file as Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-417. Ld. Counsel for the complainant further argued that had the Complainants known that Gynaecologist or Obstetrician or other qualified medical personnel are not available at CHC Sitto Gunno, they would not have got Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur admitted there and denied them opportunity of timely approaching competent doctors for treatment, which lead to complications, renal failure, septicaemia, septic shock, shutting down of organs and finally death of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur. Ld. Counsel for the complainants referred the statements of CW-1 Dr. Simran Kaur, Kidney Specialist, DMC, Ludhiana, statement of CW-2 Dr. Sumit Kumar, Associate Professor Medicine, Department of Medicine, GGS College, Faridkot, statement of CW-3 Dr. Sunil Kumar Juneja, Professor of Obs & Gyne, DMC Ludhiana, statement of CW-4 Dr. Latika Nagpal, Nagpal Nursing Home, Abohar and also referred the case law titled as Superintendent, Royapettah Govt. Hospital Vs. R. Lakshmi, 2016 (2) CPJ, 639 (NC), Sukanti Behera Vs. Dr. Sashi Bhusan Rath &another, 1993 (2) CPJ, 633 (SCDRC Orissa), Health Secretary, Ministry of Health and anr. Vs. K Albert & anr. 2015 (3) CLT, 69 (NC), Vijay H. Mankar Vs. Dr. Mangla Bansod & others, 2000 (1) CPJ, 37 (NC), Dr. Biswapati Banerjee Vs. Smt. Mayna Chatterjee, 2008 (4) CPR, 220 (SCDRC West Bengal), Thavarmal (Deceased) & Ors. Vs. Sheela Maternity Hospital and Practure Clinic & anr., 2015 (2) CPJ, 618 (NC), Dinesh Jaiswal (died) through LRs & others Vs. Bombay Hospital and Medical Research Center & another, 2010 (1) CPJ, 176(NC). Lastly, prayed for acceptance of the complaint.
9. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the OPs No.1 to 8 reiterated all the facts mentioned in the written statement, contents of which are supported with Affidavits of Dr. Ravi Bansal, M.O, CHC Sitto Gunno (Ex.OP-1), staff Nurses Harjit Kaur, Manju, Ms Mamta and Ms. Amandeep Kaur and argued that on dated
11
12.05.2020 patient Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was found present in front of labour room in early hours at about 04:40 a.m. when staff Nurse Smt. Harjit Kaur alongwith Manju was on routine round of hospital and immediately, she was attended and admitted under Govt. JSSK Scheme free of cost at about 5:00 a.m. and thereafter at about 09:56 a.m., the normal vaginal delivery took place. Ld. Counsel for the OPs further argued that it was clearly told to the attendants of the patient that though a Surgeon Dr. Ravi Bansal, M.S. (OP No.4) is posted there but the Govt. was getting his services under Covid-19 at CHC Ramsara. Ld. Counsel for the OPs further argued that all the precautions and care and procedure was followed by the OPs and there was no medical negligence or carelessness on the part of the OPs No.5 to 8 while conducting the delivery of the complainant's wife Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, however, after delivery at about 02:15 PM, patient complained of lower abdomen and bleeding per vagina and after consulting with the OP No.4 on mobile phone, immediately first line treatment was given and as per his advice, patient immediately referred to the Civil Hospital, Abohar. Ld. Counsel for the OPs further argued that instead of taking the patient to the Civil Hospital Abohar, complainant shifted the patient to Nagpal Nursing Home, Abohar. Ld. Counsel for the OPs further argued that neither the complainant has placed on file any expert opinion/report nor has examined any expert witness to prove that there was medical negligence on the part of the OPs. Ld. Counsel for the OPs further referred the statements of witnesses examined by the complainants as CW-1 Dr. Simran Kaur, CW-2 Dr. Sumit Kumar, CW-3 Dr. Sunil Kumar Juneja, and CW-4 Dr. Latika Nagpal, and argued that these doctors have also not stated any medical negligence or carelessness on the part of the OPs. Ld. Counsel for the OPs further referred officials letters dated 02.02.2021, 02.02.2021, 03.02.2021, 04.02.2021(Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-5), office order as Ex.OP6, and other documents placed on file and argued that there was no medical negligence or
12
carelessness on the part of Doctors and Nursing Staff as it was a normal delivery and there was natural post-delivery complications (PPH) not the medical negligence on the part of OPs nurses. It is also argued that complainant does not fall under the definition of Consumer qua the OPs being Govt. Hospital as no consideration was charged from the complainant and treated free of cost rather the amount was paid as per Scheme of Punjab Govt. and there was also no ill will on their part of OPs nurses rather the complainant's wife was treated in emergency and during peak period of CORONA Virus and Lock Down period and prayed for dismissal of the complaint and also referred the case law "Jacob Mathew Vs. State of Punjab" Criminal appeal Nos.144-145 of 2004, D/d 05.08.2005(SC), "Indian Medical Association Vs. V.P. Shantha and Ors." Civil Appeal No.668 of 1993, D/d 13.11.1995(SC) and "Shanta
V. Gowda Vs. Kempegowda Institute of Medical Science & another" F.A. No.74 of 2005, D/d 11.09.2012(NC).
10. After hearing to the Ld. Counsels for the parties at length, this Commission is of the considered view that it is not disputed that wife of complainant Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, who was pregnant, visited the hospital i.e. Community Health Centre, Sitto Gunno (OP No.3) on dated 12.05.2020 due to labour pain in the early hours and after completing the formalities, she was got admitted by the Staff Nurses (OPs No.5 & 6) posted there, as no Gynaecologist and Obstetrician doctor was posted there by the Govt. and only one doctor namely Dr. Ravi Bansal, MS (SMO) was working, whose duty was also deputed at Village Ramsara due to Covid- 19 on the said date i.e. 12.05.2020, and Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur delivered a male child at about 10:00 AM on the same date i.e. 12.05.2020 through normal delivery.
11. The first grievance of the complainants is that when in the early morning on dated 12.05.2020,complainant No.1's wife Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur visited the OP No.3 Govt. Hospital CHC Sitto Gunno for her delivery as she was pregnant, was
13
attended there only by the Staff nurses and not by any Gynaecologist and Obstetrician doctor or any qualified doctor and during the course of delivery, she suffered tear in Cervix, postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) and products of conception were also not removed, due to which, she also suffered contracted infection but no recourse were taken to treat with that conditions of the patient by way of repair of Cervix or controlling the haemorrhage or removal of retained products of conception or treating/controlling the infection or effecting blood transfusion, therefore, the condition of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur deteriorated and to cover up their negligent act, the OPs No.5 to 8 prepared false records and referred her to Nagpal Hospital, Abohar on the same day i.e. 12.05.2020 and on the next day, she was referred to the higher centre and she was got admitted in GGS Medical College & Hospital, Faridkot on dated 13.05.2020 where she remained up to 17.05.2020 where Cervical tear was repaired and twice blood transfusion and thrice haemodialysis were done, however, due to critical condition, she was got admitted in Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana and remained there upto 25.06.2020 and the doctors there performed Dilatation and Curettage on Sukhwinder Kaur and found adherent clots inside the uterus, vaginal swabs disclosed growth of Kelbsiella bacteria. Thereafter, on dated 26.06.2020, she was taken to PGI, Chandigarh where she died on the same day, and a certificate (Ex.C-6) was issued showing cause of death due to Cardio pulmmary-avy with antecedent cause being PPH with Sepsis, so there was medical negligence on the part of the OPs but this plea of the complainants is not tenable as it is admitted case of the complainants that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur visited to the Govt. Hospital i.e. CHC Sitto Gunno in the early hours of morning i.e. near about 05:00 a.m. on dated 12.05.2020 with labour pains and she was noticed by the staff nurses Harjit Kaur and Manju (OPs No.5 & 6) when they were taking round in the morning and immediately, she was got admitted under JSSK Scheme launched by
14
the Govt. of Punjab free of cost, after following the procedure and she delivered a male child through normal delivery at about 09:56 a.m. on the same day, which is duly evident from the admission form (Ex.C-2 colly at page No.11 to 25). So, from these facts, it is clear that there was no opportunity with the Nurses of the CHC Sitto Gunno to refer the said patient to any other hospital in that emergency situation. Moreover, the nurses were qualified, having vast experience and doing the deliveries being authorized by the Govt. to carry out the deliveries at CHC, Sitto Gunno. Furthermore, there was peak period of Corona Virus and movements were very restricted and hospitals were overloaded due to Covid patients. Further, the plea of the complainant that complainant No.1/attendants were not disclosed that no Gynaecologist and Obstetrician doctor or any qualified doctor was posted at CHC Sitto Gunno, is also have no weightage as according to the version of the OPs No.5 to 8, Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur and her attendants were duly informed that there was no Gynaecologist and Obstetrician doctor posted and Dr. Ravi Bansal (OP No.4) has been deputed by the Govt. at Village Ramsara due to peak period of Corona Virus on 12.05.2020 and these facts were already in the knowledge of the complainant and Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur and even in the knowledge of Aasha worker namely Ms. Gurmeet Kaur that no Gynaecologist and Obstetrician doctors were posted there by the Govt. of Punjab there as she had already visited 2 times as OPD patient earlier on dated 08.04.2020 and on 01.05.2020 in routine check-up (OPD Slip Ex.C-2 colly at page No.5). Further, these facts also cannot be overlooked that delivery in question was vaginal normal delivery performed by the Nurses who were qualified and having vast experience and were also authorized by the Health Department, which is also duly evident from the Photocopy of certificates placed on file as Ex.OP-26, Ex.OP-36 and the data showing the delivery carried out by the Staff Nurses placed on file as Ex.OP-30, Ex.OP-32, Ex.OP-40 & Ex.OP-42. Further as far as concerned to the
15
version of the complainants that during the course of delivery Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur suffered tear in Cervix, retained products of conception, postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), due to which, she contracted infection and no recourse were taken to treat with that conditions of the patient but this plea of the complainants is also not tenable as there was normal delivery which took place at 09:56 am on the same day and after that patient was shifted to ward at 02:30 pm by the staff nurses as the duty of OP No.4 Dr. Ravi Bansal was at Village Ramsara due to Covid-19, which is duly evident from the admission form (Ex.C-2 colly at page No.11 to 25) and after that she was referred to the Govt. higher centre but the attendants of Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur took her to the private Nagpal Hospital, Abohar on the same day and she was got admitted at about 07:00 p.m. and thereafter she was taken to the GGS Medical College & Hospital, Faridkot and thereafter she was taken to DMC, Ludhiana and after that at PGI, Chandigarh, where she expired on dated 26.06.2020 i.e. after a period of near about 46 days of date of delivery. So, this Commission is of the considered view that in fact, Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur may not suffer from Sepsis and infection in the Govt. Hospital CHC, Sitto Gunno as she remained admitted there for few hours after delivery rather Sepsis, infection and growth of Klebsiella Bacteria might have developed due to shifting the patient from one hospital to another for more than 46 days against medical advice of the doctors and lack of proper treatment, care, blood transfusion, dialysis etc. in these hospitals i.e. at Nagpal Hospital, Abohar, GGS Medical College, Faridkot, DMC Ludhiana & PGI Chandigarh.
12. Further, we have gone through the statement of CW-4 Dr. Latika Nagpal, Nagpal Nursing Home, Abohar, where Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur was firstly got admitted on the same day i.e. 12.05.2020, who has stated that "on local examination, no intra uterine bleedings, muscle bleeder was present and there was muscle tear in vagina wall which was stitched and pack (gauze) was put to prevent further
16
bleeding". It has been further stated that at the time of referral vital stable, per abdomen uterus contracted well. It has been further stated that when the patient was checked, the condition of uterus was fine and there was no intra uterine bleeding and there was least possibility of retained products of conception. In cross-examination, it has been also admitted by the said Dr. Latika Nagpal that she was not sure that whether the patient was in sepsis but investigation showed sepsis but there is no lab report of any laboratory regarding the investigations. Even it has been admitted that she is not clear whether it was an episiotomy or perineal tear. Postpartum haemorrhage is known complication of normal delivery. Further, CW-2 Dr. Sunit Kumar, Associate Professor Medicine, GGS College, Faridkot has stated that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur after referring from private hospital and getting normal delivery, she was got admitted on dated 13.05.2020 in Gyne ward with complaint of Anaemia, Sepsis (acute kidney injury), as per record, Cervical tear was identified and repaired uneventfully. Higher antibiotics were also given for sepsis, however, patient took discharge on request (DOR) from the hospital with full consent along with transfusion and dialysis. In cross-examination, it has been stated that he cannot comment on the query of cervical tear repairs which is mentioned in his examination in chief, but as per record, cervical repair has been done from some private hospital. Further, CW-1 and CW-3 Dr. Simran Kaur, Kidney Specialist, DMC, Ludhiana and Dr. Sunil Kumar Juneja, Profession of Obs & Gyne, DMC, Ludhiana, who have admitted that patient Sukhwinder Kaur was got admitted on dated 17.05.2020 as she underwent normal vaginal delivery at Sitto Gunno Hospital and thereafter referred to GGS Hospital, Faridkot. The patient twice underwent procedure of dilatation and evacuation for removal of retained products of conception. She also underwent dialysis, her condition was serious but the attendants of the patient got her referred to PGI Chandigarh on dated 25.06.2020 against medical advice. However, in cross-
17
examination, it has been said that he cannot tell about the cervical tear repair. Dr. Sunil Kumar Juneja has admitted in cross-examination that on dated 23.05.2020, on his examination, cervix and vagina was healthy and there was no sutures were found on cervix or vagina. It has been further admitted that no retained products of conception was found in Histopathology examination (Ex.OP-1/4). All the above doctors, i.e. of Nagpal Hospital, Abohar, GGS Hospital, Faridkot and DMC, Ludhiana have nowhere mentioned in the treatment record or disclosed in their respective statements (CW1 to CW-4) that there was any medical negligence on the part of OPs No.3 to 8 at Govt. Hospital i.e. CHC, Sitto Gunno. The complainants have neither placed on file any expert opinion of any medical board nor has any such application to obtain any expert opinion been moved by the complainants.
13. Further, the complainants have filed the present complaint only against the staff Nurses of CHC, Sitto Gunno alleging medical negligence on their part where she remained admitted for just few hours and normal vaginal delivery took place but the Doctors of Nagpal Hospital, Abohar, GGS Medical College & Hospital Faridkot, DMC, Ludhiana and PGI Chandigarh, have not been impleaded to due to the reason best known to them, whereas, it is admitted case that Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur had expired after 46 days from the date of delivery and remained admitted for couple of days in these hospitals and blood transfusion and dialysis were done and possibilities cannot be ruled out that sepsis and contracted infection were developed during admission there and the patient could not be properly treated at Nagpal Hospital, Abohar, GGS Medical College & Hospital, Faridkot and thereafter at DMC, Ludhiana also and PGI Chandigarh.
14. Further, the arguments advanced by the counsel for the OPs have also weightage that complainants do not fall under the definition of consumer as Smt.
18
Sukhwinder Kaur was treated free of cost under JSSK Scheme launched by the Govt. of Punjab and no consideration was charged by the OPs.
15. The Hon'ble Apex Court of India has held in case titled as "Indian Medical Association Vs. V.P. Shantha and Ors." Civil Appeal No.668 of 1993, D/d 13.11.1995 and case law titled as "Jacob Mathew Vs. State of Punjab" CA Nos.144-145 of 2004, D/d 05.08.2005, as under:
"Medical Negligence - An error of judgment on part of professional is not negligence - A private complaint against doctor may not be entertained unless the complaint is supported by another competent doctor."
16. Further, the Hon'ble NCDRC, New Delhi in another case titled as
"Shanta V. Gowda Vs. Kempegowda Institute of Medical Science and another"
F.A. No.74 of 2005, D/d 11.09.2012, has held that:
"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Sections 2 (1) (g) and 21 (1) (C) Medical Science - Death from fever of patient - Complainant's husband a lecturer in Bangalore Institute of Technology suffering from fever was admitted in OP Hospital respondent No.1 and was treated by the respondent No.2 - But patient got no relief from medicines administered by the respondent and more complications had developed - Even oxygen was not given in time when patient was advised to shift to other hospital in a crucial condition, driver of Ambulance was not available - Due to delay in reaching to other hospital, the patient had expired - Complainant claimed a sum of Rs.17 lacs for causing death of her husband due to negligence in treatment - State Commission dismissed the complaint - Revision filed - It is clear from the report of Enquiry Committee that there was no dereliction of duty on the part of respondents - The contention of the petitioner that Crocin or Paracetamol was administered wrongly to patient is not acceptable as treatment was given according to establish medical procedure - No case of medical negligence proved - Revision dismissed."
17. Further, the Hon'ble National Commission in another case law titled as Raj Kumar Vishve Vs. Vandana Gupta, 2007 (3), CLT, 97 (NC) has held that
"death due to post partum haemorrhage (PPH) suffered by the deceased as a result of
19
prolonged labour which she had to suffer for want of timely consent of caesarean section which was given after 8 hours - unrebutted evidence of respondent doctor, supported by other surgeon and medical literature - petitioner did not file any Affidavit of any expert nor he choose to cross-examine either of the doctor - Order of Fora below dismissing the complaint of petitioner upheld."
18. Further, in another case titled as Heirs of deceased Narasima Reddy Vs. MD Rohini Hospital & Ors. 2005 (2) CLT, 156 (NC), it has been held that:
"Medical negligence - A doctor is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with the practice accepted as proper by a reasonable body of medical men skilled in that particular art - it is for the expert doctor to decide what type of treatment should be given and to decide whether operation should be performed or not - the duty of doctor or hospital is expected to take reasonable care in administration of treatment - they cannot be condemned in case of misadventure."
19. In another case titled as Inderjit Singh Vs. Jagdeep Singh, 2004 (2), CLT, 659 (NC), the Hon'ble National Commission has held that:-
"Medical negligence - alleged wrong operation of left eye causing loss of 75% vision - no expert evidence brought on record by the petitioner/complainant that there was negligence shown by the respondent while implanting the lenses in the eyes of complainant - finding of Fora below that no medical negligence prove upheld."
20. The case law referred by the counsel for the complainants are not disputed but every case has its own facts. Nutshell, taking into consideration the above noted facts and in the absence of any expert evidence, this Commission is of the considered view that complainants have failed to prove any medical negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
21. Resultantly, in the sequel discussion noted above and in view of the case law referred above, this Commission is of the considered view that complainants have failed to prove any medical negligence and deficiency in service
20
on the part of the OPs. Accordingly, the present complaint filed by the complainants is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. A copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per the rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open Commission:
Dated: 02.07.2026
(Ashok Kumar Garg)
President
DCDRC, Sri Muktsar Sahib
(Tajinder Kaur)
Member
Note:- This Order contains pages 1 to 21 and all the pages have been dictated, checked and signed by me.
(Ashok Kumar Garg)
President
DCDRC, Sri Muktsar Sahib
Jagjit Singh
(J.S.S.)
21