Hospital wrongly removes man’s spleen, penalised in Tamil Nadu
By Express News Service | Published: 16th April 2018 02:50 AM |
MADURAI, CHENNAI: The district consumer disputes redressal forum ordered a private hospital doctor to pay a compensation of Rs 2.25 lakh to a patient who was admitted for treatment of jaundice but whose spleen was removed.
According to the petitioner’s council, the patient, M Beemarajan, who is a tailor by profession and a resident of Y Othakadai, had body pain and excessive tiredness. He approached a private hospital run by S Karthick in Y Othakadai, where he was diagnosed to be suffering from jaundice. The doctor reportedly advised Beemarajan to get admitted to a hospital at Narayanapuram, where he was asked to undergo surgery.
The surgery was performed on May 22, 2008, and Beemarajan was discharged later in the month, said the council. However, the patient apparently did not recover fully from the illness.
Later, Beemarajan was admitted to another hospital in Madurai, in February 2009, and was given ultrasonography treatment. Since this also did not help him get better, Beemarajan went to another private hospital and then to the Government Rajaji Hospital with his medical records. It was then Beemarajan came to know that his spleen had been removed through surgery, the council said.
Reportedly, despite repeated requests for a discharge summary for the treatment given at the two private hospitals, he did not receive any.
Pronouncing the judgement, the forum ordered the doctor to pay Rs 75,000 towards medical expenses, `1 lakh with 6 per cent interest for loss of spleen, and Rs 50,000 for the mental agony and strain caused to the patient.
United India Insurance fined for denying full claim amount
A Chennai consumer forum has fined the United India Insurance for having denied a health insurance policyholder the full amount, though he produced bills for the claim.
The complainant, K Nirmal Chand Sethiya, made a claim for a sum of `1.87 lakh to the insurance company, of which the company settled only `1.43 lakh and disallowed the part claim amount of `44,158 allegedly without any reason.
“The opposite party has not stated any reason in the written version how it has disallowed a sum of Rs 44,158 in the claim amount,” said the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Chennai (North).
The United India Insurance, on its part, said the dispute was only with regard to quantum of the disallowed amount and said that Sethiya ought to have referred his grievance to the arbitration. However, the forum rubbished this claim.
The company has been directed to pay a sum of Rs 25,000 towards compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses.