“The Complaint filed by the Dentist for getting Rs.30 lakhs for botched surgery, was dismissed”.

Case Details:
Dr.Rai Abhishek V/s. Joy Hospital Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai & anr.
Consumer Complaint No.CC/11/273,
decided on 24/04/2017, by SCDRC, Mumbai.


Facts in short:
1. The Complainant – Doctor met with an accident on
or about 10.10.2009 as his 2 wheeler dashed on road divider and his jaw was fractured with resultant mal-union and mandible broken into three parts.
2. After initial treatment at another Hospital, he was shifted to the Respondent Hospital after 9-10 days for plastic surgery. The Complainant alleged that no proper informed consent was taken from him and most importantly It was alleged that his fractured bones were mismanaged and drugs administered caused the mental problem, etc.
3.The Hospital- treating Doctors strongly refuted the allegations of negligence and it was conceded that being the Doctor himself, not only the Doctors sacrificed their personal fees, but the world class treatment at concessional rate was given to the Complainant.

Held :
1. The State commission dismissed the Complaint.
2. It observed that there was no hospital record which would show that the treatment was wrong.The treating Doctor was also very qualified.
3. There was no expert opinion obtained by the Complainant.
4.The Complainant did adhere to the advice given by Dr. A. P. Chitre Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon, Bombay Hospital, for osteotomy of the right side of the upper jaw. The Commission raised the question as to what prevented the complainant from availing services of Dr. Chitre.
5. The Commission relied on the landmark judgments of Supreme Court in the case of Jacob Mathew vs. State Of Punjab & Anr and Martin F. D’Souza vs Mohd. Ishfaq, which spells out how to decide the negligence of Doctors.
6. Lastly, it observed that the treatment accorded to the Complainant was not only concessional and affordable but also successful as despite having suffered serious injuries
the Patient recovered well enough to carry on his profession as Dentist. The Complainant who conducted his case personally could also speak English fluently !!

After the recent Delhi case filed by the Gynecologist against the Ophthalmologist, this is the 2nd case in a row filed by the Doctor, against the Doctor. Although the percentage of such peculiar cases is very low as compared to the cases filed by general patients, still it gives a different message to the Medical Fraternity. isn’t it?

Thanks and Regards,

Adv. Rohit Erande
Pune. ©

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.