Mumbai: Doctor, hospital must pay dead patient’s kin Rs 12L, says NCDRC

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission NCDRC has upheld a state commissionrsquos order directing a citybased hospital and a doctor to pay more than Rs 12 lakh in compensation to the family of a senior citizen 15 years after her death due to excessive use of anaesthetics during surgeryThe NCDRC had on March 29 rejected the appeal filed by the doctor and the hospital challenging the order passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 2015 in favour of the victimrsquos familyThe NCDRC held that though negligence was attributable to the anaesthesiologist the hospital shall not be absolved from vicarious liabilityAs per the complaint filed by the daughter of the deceased woman Kusum 66 was operated on by Dr Ajay Rathore an orthopaedician at Parelbased hospital for a fracture on her forearm on June 21 2008The anaesthesiologist was Dr Mulji Khemji Gada who died during the proceedings before the state commissionThough the operation was conducted in the morning the patient did not regain consciousness due to the excessive use of anaesthesia Her condition worsened further she was intubated and put on a ventilator it statedThe patient was hospitalised for a long period in an unconscious condition The neurologist after performing a CT scan and MRI diagnosed her with lsquohypoxic encephalopathyrsquo Thereafter the unconscious patient was shifted to another hospital where she died on October 24 2008Initially a complaint was filed before the district forum Central Mumbai which rejected her pleaAlso read Mumbai Mask up civicrun hospital personnel told as city witnesses surge in Covid casesThe family then moved the state consumer commission in 2015 In 2018 it ruled in their favour and ordered the hospital and doctor to pay a compensation of more than Rs 12 lakhIn 2019 the doctor and the hospital filed appeals before the national consumer commission denying any negligenceThe NCDRC held that it is evident that the anaesthesiologist had not performed the preanaesthetic test properly ldquoIn my view it was the negligence and failure of duty of care from the anaesthesiologist who administered an excessive dose of ketamine and failed to manage the hypoxic eventrdquo it observedIt is pertinent to note that the anaesthesiologist did not even read the reports of investigations of the patient the NCDRC saidThe expert committee report from the department of traumatology and orthopaedic surgery of Grant Medical College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals had stated that there was no medical negligence on the part of the operating surgeonThe NCDRC however referred to the opinion of one of the experts a neurosurgeon who cited that as a certain parameter was low it should have been built up before surgery and preanaesthetic fitness should have been recorded ldquoIt was a valid point that the other experts have not commented on this point As there was no recovery from anaesthesia after the operation in my view the pre and postoperative care was certainly doubtful in the instant caserdquo it notedIt further said that even though the anaesthesiologist died during proceedings before the state commission and his legal heirs were brought on record ldquoright to sue survivesrdquo against himldquoThough negligence was attributable to the anesthesiologist the hospital shall not be absolved from the vicarious liability the national commission saidThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever