அறுவை சிகிச்சைக்கு மயக்க மருததுவர் அவசியம்

Decided on 16.5.2006 NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTESREDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHIDR. G. VIVEKANANDA VARMA Vs. CHINTA BHARAMARAMBA & ORS. Revision Petition No. 714 of 2006

As regards non-hiring of an anesthetist for performing Tonsillectomy and instead giving anesthesia himself, the petitioner alleged that the patient’s attendants expressed their financial difficulties and, therefore, he did not avail the services of a separate Anesthetist

In a similar case National Commission has decided in Reji Mathew & Anr. v. Dr. Radha Krishnan & Anr., F.A. 47 of 1996 that in absence of medical record to be relied upon to prove that the Doctor is not guilty of medical negligence, it was held that the burden or onus of proof is on the Doctor who has done the surgery to prove that necessary precaution has been taken. Similar view has been taken in Savita Garg (Smt.) v. Director, National Heart Institute by the Apex Court. In this case the petitioner Surgeon gave anesthesia himself and has not shown how the complication of “Anoxic Encephalopathy” arose that whether immediate action was taken to avoid the complication and whether timely treatment has been imparted to the patient to avoid Anoxic Encephalopathy is not shown by the petitioner. From the records of Swatantra Hospital and NIIMS it is seen that the patient died following Anoxic Encephalopathy suffered during Tonsillectomy. With regard to this we agree with the findings of the State Commission that there is deficiency in service and negligence by the petitioner.

Tonsillectomy operation மயக்க மருத்துவர் இல்லாமல் அறுவை சிகிச்சை செய்த மருத்துவரே மயக்க மருந்து உபயோகப்படுத்தி செய்கின்றார். நோயாளிக்கு முற்றிலுமாக oxygen தடைப்பட்டதால்,  நோயாளி  anoxic Encephalopathy ஆல் பாதிக்கப்பட்டு இறந்துவிடுகின்றார் Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies. இழப்பீடு வழங்க ஆணையிடப்படுகின்றது.