Medical Negligence in Gujarat: Patient Dies After Doctor Removes Kidney Instead of Stone, Hospital Ordered To Pay Rs 11.23 Lakh Compensation
Ahmedabad, October 19: KMG General Hospital in Balasinor town of Gujarat has been ordered to pay Rs 11.23 lakh compensation in connection with a case of medical negligence where a patient died after the doctor removed his kidney instead of kidney stone. The patient, Devendrabhai Raval from Vanghroli village of Kheda district, died in January 2012 four months after his kidney was removed instead of stone by a doctor of KMG General Hospital. Depressed Doctor in Surat Kills Mother, Sister by Injecting Heavy Dose of Anesthetic Drug; Later Tries To Kill Self.
Also Read | Rebecca Ferguson Birthday: Doctor Sleep and Other Movies That We're Planning To Rewatch On Her Special Day
According to a report by Times of India, Raval consulted Dr Shivubhai Patel of KMG General Hospital after he started experiencing severe back pain and difficulty in urine flow. In May 2011, a 14 mm stone was detected in his left kidney. He was advised to go to a better facility, but he chose to undergo surgery in the same hospital. On September 3, 2011, the doctor performed a surgery. Stray Cow Attacks Octogenarian, Kicks and Tramples Him to Death in Broad Daylight in Gujarat's Ahmedabad.
After the operation, according to the TOI report, the doctor informed Raval's family that instead of the stone, the kidney had to be removed "in the best interest of the patient". But Raval's condition continued to deteriorate and despite treatment at two other hospitals, he died of renal complications on January 8, 2012. Subsequently, his widow, Minaben, lodged a complaint with the Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission at Nadiad.
Also Read | Sasta Recharge Wala Connecting People With Their Seamless Platform Experience
In 2012, the Commission ordered the doctor, the hospital and the United India Insurance Co Ltd to pay compensation of Rs 11.23 lakh to Minaben for the medical negligence. To determine who should pay the compensation, the involved parties reached the Gujarat State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, which held that the hospital must take responsibility for the negligent act of its employee.
It said: "The employer is responsible not only for his own acts or commission and omission, but also for the negligence of its employees so long as the act occurs within the course and scope of the employment. This liability is according to the principle of ‘respondent superior’ meaning ‘let the master answer’."
