Consumer Court fines ₹30 Lacs on Homeo for posing as Gynaec

Commission decides case of Medical Negligence

The Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission issued a ruling. The complainant alleged that despite holding only a homeopathic medicine degree, the homeopathy practitioner prescribed allopathic medicines to his wife. They must pay over ₹30 lakh as compensation. This is in response to a case involving medical negligence. The incident led to the death of a man’s pregnant wife. The tragedy occurred soon after the delivery of their child. [Vinay Kumar Mishra vs. Mankameshwar Nursing Home].

Facts of the case

Vinay Kumar Mishra lodged a complaint, stating that his wife was admitted to Mankameshwar Nursing Home on January 15, 2014, giving birth to a female child the next day. 

Dr. Meena Pandey, who had allegedly presented herself as a gynaecologist, had asked Mishra to arrange for blood. However, upon reaching the hospital after arranging the blood, he discovered that his wife had died due to excessive bleeding.

Mishra was shocked upon learning that Dr. Pandey was only having a degree in homeopathic medicine but had treated his wife with allopathic medicine. Besides filing a complaint with the Police and Medical Council, he also approached the Commission for compensation.

The hospital and the doctor denied the allegation that Dr. Pandey had presented herself as a gynaecologist or that she had prescribed any allopathic medicine. It was submitted that the patient was treated by Dr Pandey’s husband, who is a MBBS doctor and co-owner of the nursing home.  

Observations of Commission

The Commission found that even though the patient’s condition had become critical after profuse bleeding, she had not been shifted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). 

“At 1 PM on 16. 01.2014 the patient was declared dead. It shows that there was total lack of post delivery treatment in which the opposite parties totally failed to discharge their duties. They were negligent in not providing the supportive medical care as per medical protocol to the patient,” the Commission added.

It further opined that the blood should have been arranged for at the very beginning and not at the 11th hour.

“It was duty of the opposite parties to inform the patient’s attendant in time about the need of any blood or any other medicines which may be necessary in the treatment of the patient but they have taken it very lightly. So there is medical negligence and the maxim res ipsa loquitur applies in this case,” the Commission said.

Award

Accordingly, the consumer state commission held that complainant was entitled to a payment of ₹25 lakh for medical negligence and deficiency in service. ₹5 lakh for mental pain and agony and ₹20,000 towards the costs of the case.

If you need any support in such a case please contact [email protected]

Visit us at http://www.consumerseva.com for more information.