KKN Gurugram Desk | In a significant ruling, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Muzaffarpur has imposed a fine of ₹5 lakh on Muzaffarpur Eye Hospital. The penalty comes after a patient, Neela Devi from Khariaka village in Saran district, lost vision in her right eye due to alleged medical negligence during a cataract surgery conducted on November 14, 2017 .
Background of the Case
Neela Devi underwent cataract surgery at the renowned Muzaffarpur Eye Hospital, paying a fee of ₹700 for the procedure. Post-surgery, her condition deteriorated, leading to complete vision loss in her right eye. Despite her worsening state, the hospital reportedly failed to provide adequate post-operative care.
Legal Proceedings
After unsuccessful attempts to seek redressal from the hospital, Neela Devi approached human rights advocate S.K. Jha. Subsequently, on March 31, 2022, a formal complaint was filed with the District Consumer Commission in Muzaffarpur. The complaint named six individuals associated with the hospital, including the President, Vice President, Secretary, Joint Secretary, Dr. Praveen Kumar, and an OT Assistant.
Commission’s Findings
The commission found that the hospital failed to provide proper medical services, violating the Consumer Protection Act. An investigation ordered by the commission, conducted by a team of doctors appointed by the Civil Surgeon of Muzaffarpur, confirmed that Neela Devi’s vision loss was irreversible.
Compensation and Penalties
The commission, led by President Piyush Kamal Dixit and member Sunil Kumar Tiwari, directed Muzaffarpur Eye Hospital to compensate Neela Devi with ₹5 lakh, along with an annual interest of 7%, payable within 45 days. Additionally, the hospital was ordered to pay ₹10,000 towards legal expenses. Failure to comply within the stipulated period would result in an increased interest rate of 9% on the total amount .
Advocate’s Statement
Advocate S.K. Jha expressed satisfaction with the commission’s decision, stating that it reinforces faith in the legal system and serves as a reminder of the importance of accountability in medical services.
Implications
This case underscores the critical need for medical institutions to adhere to standard protocols and provide diligent care to patients. It also highlights the role of consumer protection laws in addressing grievances arising from medical negligence.
The ruling serves as a precedent, emphasizing that medical institutions must uphold the highest standards of care and are accountable for lapses that adversely affect patients’ lives.
