O.AISHA BI vs J.R.DANIAL

COMPLAINANTS are the legal heirs of deceased Janab O.S. Abdul Rasheed, who have filed the complaint alleging medical negligence against the opposite party, Prof J.R. Daniel.

BRIEFLY the facts of the case are that the deceased had pain in the lower back region in end April, 1998 and was referred to the opposite party by his Orthopaedic Surgeon for certain tests, i.e., bone biopsy. O.P. is alleged to have drilled 12 F bone biopsy needle, under local anaesthesia. In the process of this biopsy the opposite party is reported to have negligently pierced the blood vessels resulting in internal bleeding and heavy pain. When the O.P''s advice could not help much, and this pain persisted, deceased was taken to Apollo Hospital in Chennai and an emergency surgery was done and lumber artery repaired. Discharge summary read as follows : "Mr. Abdul Rasheed, known case of COPD, hypertension and diabetes with past history of right hemiparesis and with history of abdominal mass following recent lumber vertebral biopsy on 29.4.1998 was evaluated thoroughly CBC showed Hb of 6.1 gm% and ultrasound revealed hypoechoic collection of fluid right iliac fossa. Since his general condition started deteriorating rapidly with hypertension etc., he was taken up for emergency laparotomy on 2.5.1998, found to have retroperitoneal haematoma. Evacuation of haematoma was done and lumber arterial bleeder was also ligated. He was seen by consultants of various fields and his renal parameters, electrolytes, hormonal status, blood gases etc., were monitored periodically. Post-operatively his conscious level had deteriorated and he needed prolonged ventilatory support. Tracheostomy was done on 13.5.1998 to enable tracheal toileting and ventilator support. Slowly the support was weaned off and he was shifted to ward but he had 2-3 episodes of hypoxia, hypercapnia and aspiration needing ICCU care and ventilator support intermittently."

Deceased never really fully recovered. He was taken to Mercury Nursing Home and Aysha Nursing Hospital but to no avail and he died on 21.8.1998.

Negligence is attributed to mishandling of needle biopsy by the O.P. Dr. Daniel, on account of whose carelessness and negligence, the biopsy needle pierced the blood vessel from which he never recovered, leading to his death. This alleging medical negligence the complaint was filed praying for compensation of Rs. 25 lakhs and medical expenditure of over Rs. 8 lakhs and costs.

AT the admission stage and subsequently several opportunities were given to the learned Counsel of the complainants to file report of any doctor to substantiate the averments made in the complaint which has not been filed nor any medical literature produced before us in support of the allegation. On the last date of hearing. Learned Counsel showed his helplessness in this regard for want of any instructions from the complainants. We ourselves have perused the material on record. There is no evidence on record of any negligence in the procedure adopted for needle biopsy adopted by the opposite party. Allegation of medical negligence is a serious matter and we need to be satisfied that prima facie the case exists of negligence on the part of opposite party. On record we have nothing except the complainant alleging negligence in bald terms which we find unacceptable even in these unfortunate circumstances. Learned Counsel for the complainant has no instructions on the subject. In the circumstances we have no alternative but to dismiss the complaint on grounds of non-prosecution and we do so accordingly. We make it clear that we are not commenting on the merits of the case - one way or the other. The complainants shall be free to seek remedy, it they so wish, in a Civil Court and would be entitled to seek extension of time limit under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as laid down by Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Luxmi Engineering Works v. P.S.G. Industrial Institute, II (1995) CPJ 1 (SC)=(1995) 3 SCC 583. Complaint dismissed.