13-21 DIAGNOSTICS.

See also PATHOLOGY; AND RADIOLOGY/5ONOLOGY

13-21.1 Diagnostics-Microbiologist-Non-conducting of tests in time after taking samples-Family doctor of a minor patient, suffering from fever, suspecting Leptospirosis referring to Apollo Hospital for conduct of certain tests before treatment for the dreadful disease-Patient taken by his mother to the hospital at 5.30 p.m.-Necessary and requisite samples taken by the OP after receipt of payment demanded but no test conducted on that day on the plea that Microbiology Department of the hospital does not function after 5 p.m. except in emergency cases but the complainant's case only a routine examination-Laboratory attached to the hospital a 24 hrs. laboratory-Omission to conduct tests on the day of taking sample, deficiency in service-But tests conducted in another hospital and the results indicated that patient not suffering from any such suspected disease- Though complainants suffered no injury, opposite party liable to pay compensation of Rs. 2,000/- for mental agony, anguish and torture suffered by complainants-Either an act or omission to act on the facts and in the circumstances of each case at certain times tantamounts to deficiency in service. In the case on hand, the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties resulted in as a consequence of omission to act in time on their part. This shows the matter had not been duly taken into account by the Forum below and that perhaps was the reason for it to have rendered an erroneous order now impugned in the present action by way of dismissal of the complaint. It is because the laboratory attached to the 1st opposite party Apollo Hospital is a 24 hours laboratory, patient like the complainants are referred to such laboratory either by the doctors or the patients themselves knock at the doors of the laboratories of the said hospital for tests to be conducted and reports to be received in respect of the tests conducted without any loss of time for effective treatment of the malady or disease from which they suffer otherwise there is no meaning in calling the laboratory attached to the hospital as a 24 hours laboratory .Such being the case, the explanation trotted out in the very same notice under Ex. A6 stating that the Microbiology Department of the said hospital ceases to work after 5 p.m. cannot at all be expected to commend acceptance and such sort of an explanation had been offered in order to get themselves wriggle out of the legal consequences for not conducting the necessary and requisite tests on the day of the taking of the sample. This sort of non-conducting of the tests on the day of the taking of the samples in such circumstances, is an indictable omission on the part of the 1st opposite party-hospital which will definitely tantamount to deficiency in service on their part. The malady or disease leptospirosis is such a dreadful disease and the onset of such a disease has to be diagnosed at the earliest point of time by the conduct of tests and effective treatment must have to be given or otherwise the plausibility of the patient suffering from such disease dying cannot be ruled out of consideration. The tests on the 1 st complainant which were required to be performed by the 1 st opposite party Apollo Hospital was to ascertain whether he was suffering from such disease so that effective treatment is resorted to be given if there is any such onset of disease on him. In such a situation, for the 1st opposite party to take up a stand as has been taken under Notice Ex. A6 that the examination sought to be made on the 1st complainant is a routine one is beyond one's comprehension. It is not as if the 1st opposite party had taken up a stand without knowing that the stand as taken by them is wrong. Such a stand had been taken under Ex. A6 notice with a view to escape from the legal consequences to be ensued against them for indictable omission on their part in not performing the tests without any loss of time on the date of taking of the samples. The 1st complainant subsequently got admitted into the Child Trust Hospital on 8.11.1996, and got discharged from the said hospital on 10.11.1996. During his stay there, certain tests were conducted and the tests conducted on him do not at all indicate that he was suffering from leptospirosis. As such it cannot at all be stated that the 1st complainant, suffered any sort of an injury as a consequence of the dreadful disease, leptospirosis. The fact that he did not suffer any injury as such does not mean that the opposite parties-M/s. Apollo Hospital Enterprises, etc. cannot at all be mulcted with liability for payment of compensation to the complainants at least for the mental agony, torture and anguish suffered as a consequence of non-performance of the tests on the 1 st complainant for the determination of the factor as to whether he was suffering from the dreadful disease of leptospirosis in time. The mental agony, anguish and torture suffered by the 2nd complainant-mother during the said period required to be adequately compensated on the part of the opposite parties for the indictable omission on their part in conducting the necessary and requisite tests on the day of taking of the necessary and requisite samples. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it won't be besides justice to direct the opposite parties to pay compensation quantified in a sum of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainants for the mental agony, anguish and torture suffered by them. [Shahul Hameed & Anr. v. M/s. Apollo Hospital Enterprises & Ors., 2002 (2) CPJ 189: 2002 (3) CPR 1 (TN SCDRC)]

13.21.2 Diagnostics-Obstetrics/Gynaecology-mtrasonographic test-Failure of Sonologist OP to detect twin baby in the womb of the complainant-patient- Had the test report been correct, complainant would have taken extra care-Complainant giving birth to two babies-Both being in serious condition transferred to Intensive Care Unit (ICU)-Death of the babies within a few days of their birth-Deficiency in service established-Complainant entitled to reason- able compensation-A warded Rs. 25,OOO-Here the gestation was of 30 weeks duration when the Ultrasonography Test was done and this test failed to detect twin babies in the womb of the patient. Therefore, it is crystal clear that either the machine was defective or the reading of the report by OP 2 was wrong. The deficiency in service on the part of the Diagnostic Laboratory and OP 2 is quite apparent. There cannot be any two opinions about it. The patient delivered twin babies at the Maternity Clinic in Calcutta in quick succession. This amply proves that a Ultrasonography Test was not at all done or even if it was done it was done by a defective machine. There may be another possibility that OP 2 has failed to read the U.S.G. Report correctly. There cannot be any two opinions in this respect. OPs-2 and 3 had not explained as to how the report proved to be wrong. It established the deficiency in service on their part. The complainant lost the two babies within a few days of their birth. Had there been no faulty report the complainant and her family members would have taken extra care for the proper treatment and care of the babies after their birth. It is not difficult to imagine the mental agony and suffering of the complainant for the loss of children. Therefore, a reasonable compensation should be awarded in favour of the complainant so as to assuage the feelings of the mother. Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 25,0001- should be awarded as compensation against O. Ps 2 and 3. [Krishna Moni Tewariv. Dr. (Mrs.) GouriBandyopadhyay& Ors., 2003 (1) CPJ 286 (WE SCDRC)]