BHILAI STEEL PLANT & ANR.
Through Director, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital & Research Centre (JLN Hospital), Sector-09, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai Nagar, Tehsil & District
Durg
Chhattisgarh                                                          ...........Petitioner(s)
                                                    Versus     
NISHANT KUMAR SINGH
S/o. Sh. Ranjit Singh, EWS - 1626, M.P. Housing Board Thana Jamul, Tehsil & District
Durg
Chhattisgarh                                                          ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:     
     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER
     HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER

Dated : 12 Jan 2016

PER DR. S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER

1.       The instant revision petition is preferred by the petitioner, Bhilai Steel Plant Hospital, Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru Hospital & Research Centre (in short, “JLN Hospital”- OP) against the order passed by the Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur (in short, “the State Commission”) in appeal No.14/271. The main question involved in this revision petition is that the District Forum, Durg (in short, “the District Forum”) held the JLN Hospital for medical negligence caused to the complainant, Nishant Kumar Singh, during appendectomy operation performed on 25-02-2012. The District Forum awarded Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation. It was further confirmed by the State Commission, by dismissing the first appeal filed by OP.

2.       We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. A short question involved in this revision petition is whether a foreign body (mop) was negligently placed by the OP/petitioner during appendectomy surgery?  The brief facts that, complainant, Nishant Kumar Singh (herein “patient”) initially underwent appendectomy surgery on 25.2.2012 at OP hospital. Few days after discharge, patient had to visit OP hospital, time and again for pain. But, there was no avail by the treatment of OP, hence patient went to Dhanvantari Hospital on 30.4.2012 and was operated there again. They found bunch of bandages, napkin (MOP) which were left negligently during 1st surgery at OP-1.

3.       Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The counsel for the petitioner brought our attention to the medical record and the investigation reports done prior to the 2nd operation at Dhanwantri Hospital. We have perused the Barium meal and follow through x-ray dated 17.04.2012, the upper GI endoscopy report dated 07.05.2012 and the ultrasound report dated 10.05.2012. There, we do not find anything mentioned about the foreign body in the abdomen. The reports were given by qualified radiologist, gatstroenterologist. As per USG, whole abdominal cavity and the organs were normal. A small defect was noted in rectus with herniation of fat (5 mm) through it. It was reported as small ventral hernia. The counsel further argued that, the patient gone to Dhanvantri Hospital without informing the OP.  He has brought our attention towards the discharge card (27.05.2012) issued by Dhanwantri Hospital wherein, the hand written notes revealed that the patient underwent exploratory laparotomy. The operative findings revealed, Intestinal Obstruction. There were severe dense adhesions of intestine. The loops of intestine separated which revealed lump consisting of foreign body (mop). The necrosed loops of intestine were removed and anastomosis of jejunum and terminal ileum was performed.

4.       We have perused the medical record of OP- JLN Hospital which clearly goes to show that Dr. Jitendra Nath Jha and other doctors are qualified doctors. The surgical notes of appendectomy operation clearly revealed it was performed with care and caution. After 1st surgery, during follow up on 30.04.2012, the patient was diagnosed there as post appendectomy sub-acute intestinal obstruction and was managed conservatively. The patient was treated there from 24.04.2012 to 30.04.2012 with IV fluids, antibiotics and antacids. The patient was absconding since 2 P.M. on 30.04.2012. He has not paid the balance of amount. The hospital authority gave information regarding absconding of the patient. The counsel for OP produced some medical literature like Retained Surgical Sponges: CT and US Appearance [Takashi Kokubo, MD, Yuji Itai, MD. Kunj Ohtomo, MD, Kohki Yoshikawa, MD, Masahiro Lio, MD, Yutaka Atomi, MD], Sonographic Findings of Intraabdominal Foreign Bodies Due to Retained Gauze [Gastrointest Radiol 9:61-63 (1984)], Gossypiboma and Surgeon-Current Medicolegal Aspect-A Review [Indian J Surg (July-August 2012) 74(4):318-322], Report of gossypiboma from the standpoint in medicine and law [World J Gastroenterol 2005:11 (8): 1248-1240].

5.       The counsel further submitted that the District Forum and the State Commission did not record evidence or cross examine Dr. Mohit Tanwar of Dhanwantri Hospital, Bhilai, who made the observation of mop in the abdomen during second surgery on 11.05.2012.

6.       To get clarity, we have requisitioned and perused the entire record from the lower fora. The complainant has not filed any document from Dhanwantri Hospital except the hand written discharge summary. It is surprising to note that, the patient was at Dhanwantri Hospital for about one month. Complainant has not filed any cogent evidence like patient progress sheet, operative notes, operative findings, the anesthetist notes. It is not possible, that the patient sustained the MOP foreign body for more than three months in his abdomen. There is no histopathological report, no gross finding of the foreign body, the size, shape type of foreign body. The complainant failed to prove that it was a foreign body. It was the case of post appendectomy intestinal adhesions which are common in few patients. Post-operative abdominal adhesions are not a negligence. Therefore, we do not find any negligence on the part of the JLN Hospital in treating the complainant/patient. Therefore, we set aside the orders passed by both the fora below and allow this revision petition. Consequently, the complaint is dismissed.