Times of India
28 August 2010
By Rebecca Samervel
Mumbai, India

Twelve years after an autorickshaw driver was left partially paralyzed in the arm following a wrongly administered injection for a common cold, the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered that the erring doctor pay him a compensation of Rs 2.5 lakh, along with 6% interest, calculated from 2004. The complainant will also receive Rs 25,000 towards costs.

On November 9, 1996, Kurla resident Ankush Dhokale, who was suffering from cough, cold, a headache and fever, visited ayurvedic doctor Dr Anant Bhosale. Bhosale administered a Voveron injection on the back of Dhokale’s left arm, just above the elbow. Soon after that, Dhokale developed an adverse reaction to the medication, and ultimately, partially lost the use of his left arm.

Complainant suffered no disability, alleged doctor
Mumbai: Ankush Dhokale, an autorickshaw driver, filed a complaint with Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 1996 after an injection administered by ayurvedic practitioner Dr Anant Bhosale led to partial paralysis of his left arm.

While granting him compensation of Rs 2.5 lakh with interest, and Rs 25,000 in costs, the commission observed, "One should not lose sight of the fact that a simple injection to meet normal complaint of cold, fever ultimately cost the complainant (his arm) which totally changed his life due to his 40% disability. He certainly had to suffer lot of mental and psychological trauma, which cannot be adequately compensated in terms of money. His life is totally changed.’’
Considering the escalation of prices of essential commodities and the fact that 12 years had lapsed since the incident, the commission arrived at the quantum of compensation.

In an order dated July 8, 2004, Bhosale was held responsible for administering the injection on the wrong part of the body. Bhosale then filed an appeal with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. In an April 25, 2009, order, the national commission upheld the state commission order that Bhosale had been medically negligent and deficient in service. But the national commission returned the matter to the state commission to decide the quantum of compensation to be paid.

When the matter was with the state commission for the second time, Bhosale submitted evidence to show that "Dhokale suffered no disability and he is gainfully engaged in plying an autorickshaw.’’ He produced photographs that showed Dhokale driving an autorickshaw and also documents to show that he had renewed his driving licence.

Dhokale countered that he had renewed the licence only to keep it valid. He maintained that he still suffered from the disability, which was also duly certified by the civil surgeon.

In the order passed by the state commission, presided over by S B Mhase and comprising members S R Khanzode and Dhanraj Khamatkar, the doctor’s allegations were refuted. "We also had the opportunity to see the complainant personally during the course of hearing. He does suffer (from) the disability and his hand is certainly still paralysed. Obviously, he cannot use the same to the fullest extent,’’ the commission observed. It held that the doctor’s submission that Dhokale was engaged in farm activity in his village was countered by people from the village who confirmed the disability.