The Supreme Court has come down heavily on the National Consumer Commission for handling a medical negligence case of a minor child in a casual manner while the victim whose leg had to be imputed due to alleged wrong treatment 16 years ago had been fighting for the compensation ever since.
A bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly made strong observations against NCC in the case of Margesh Parikh from Baroda in Gujarat fighting for the damages since 1994 when he lost his left leg as a minor child after being admitted in the clinic of Dr M.H. Mehta for treatment of gastroenteritis.
Due to alleged “improper” administration of the glucose saline through foot veins, Mr Parikh’s leg developed “gangrene” as the needle was not inserted properly, requiring an emergency operation for imputing it from the knee.
The top court found that the NCC did not bother to inquire why there was delay of six years by Dr Mehta to submit treatment papers before the state consumer commission and why the national commission had not inquired about the affidavit of Dr Chudasma whom the child was referred after his condition become serious.
“The National Consumer Commission should have enquired as to why he (Dr Chudasma) had not filed affidavit before the state commission or examined him as a witness. These omissions on the part of NCC are extremely serious and have resulted in failure of justice,” the top court recorded in its verdict.
It pointed out that Dr Mehta “withheld” the treatment papers till the state commission had examined senior surgeon Dr Ashwin Bhamar, appointed as an expert to give his opinion on the line of treatment followed by Dr Mehta and Dr Chudasma.
“The state consumer commission had noted that the case papers were produced by the respondent (Dr Mehta) after a gap of six years and that too after the cross-examination of complainant’s (Mr Parikh’s) father and vascular surgeon Dr Bhamar,” the top court said.
While Mr Parikh had claimed compensation of `10 lakhs, the state commission awarded him `5 lakhs with 9 per cent interest but the NCC had set aside the order of the subordinate consumer forum, giving Dr Mehta clean chit.