KOLKATA: A client court on Wednesday directed a sanatorium to pay repayment of Rs 19,20,000 to the circle of relatives of a boy who had died 22 years in the past because he were administered anti rabies vaccine that were stored improperly.
The order is of particular significance because the court had first of all dismissed the circle of relatives’s attraction, saying the boy used to be now not a consumer, since he had availed himself of unfastened remedy. The circle of relatives had therefore filed every other petition, citing a Supreme Court observation that the recipient of unfastened provider used to be also a consumer.
On June 12, 1996, 15-year-old Dinanath Chowdhury used to be walking home in Gondalpara Jute Mill, Chandernagar, the place his father used to paintings as a worker, when a stray bit him. The subsequent morning, he used to be taken to the Chandannagar Sub-Divisional Hospital, the place doctors reportedly sent the boy home without any clinical attention, as an alternative asking the members of the family to look at the dog for 10 days. The circle of relatives went again to the sanatorium five days later, reporting that the dog had disappeared from the locality. It used to be most effective then that the boy used to be given an anti-rabies shot. He took anti-rabies shots for 10 days, but Dinanath’s condition saved deteriorating. He used to be taken to Beliaghata’s ID Hospital on August 7, the place he died two days later of rabies.
Since then, his circle of relatives has been running from pillar to post to get justice. They moved the Hooghly Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum days after the boy’s death. But the attraction used to be dismissed on the ground that Dinanath used to be now not a consumer, as he used to be availing himself of unfastened remedy. A fresh petition used to be filed with the state shopper court in 1998, the place Rs 2 lakh repayment used to be awarded. But the state government challenged this at the National Consumer Redressal Forum. The apex shopper court noticed that this used to be a are compatible case for repayment, but dismissed the repayment and the case, citing the same topic may just now not be raised once more, because it had already been dismissed by the district shopper forum.
The circle of relatives, alternatively, didn't accept defeat. After consulting felony mavens, it filed every other petition with the state shopper court in 2012, this time citing a 1995 Supreme Court observation that “unfastened provider would also be a provider and the recipient a consumer”. The topic used to be sent again to the district.
“After a large number of hearings, the consumer forum on Wednesday directed the sanatorium to pay the repayment amount, in conjunction with Rs 10,000 as litigation charges to the sufferer’s circle of relatives inside of a month. The circle of relatives fought a protracted combat, all through which they had to run from pillar to post to get justice,” stated Parthapratm Dasgupta of the Association for Protection of Democratic Rights, who represented the case on behalf of the sufferer’s circle of relatives.
Earlier, a professional committee on the case by the state human rights fee had stated that the vaccine used to be useless, because it had now not been preserved correctly (it were saved at room temperature), and Dinanath had now not been given the proper dose. On Wednesday, the consumer court cited this file whilst awarding the repayment. “We are yet to get a duplicate of the order. We will speak about the problem with upper officers when we get the order and take a decision,” stated Dr Subhrangshu Chakraborty, the Hooghly CMOH.
“Justice has come overdue but we're satisfied that it has now not been denied,” stated Dinanath’s uncle, Shankar Chowdhury. “My brother (the boy’s father) died this January, waiting for justice. He had develop into depressed after his son’s death. He would had been happiest nowadays.”
The order is of particular significance because the court had first of all dismissed the circle of relatives’s attraction, saying the boy used to be now not a consumer, since he had availed himself of unfastened remedy. The circle of relatives had therefore filed every other petition, citing a Supreme Court observation that the recipient of unfastened provider used to be also a consumer.
On June 12, 1996, 15-year-old Dinanath Chowdhury used to be walking home in Gondalpara Jute Mill, Chandernagar, the place his father used to paintings as a worker, when a stray bit him. The subsequent morning, he used to be taken to the Chandannagar Sub-Divisional Hospital, the place doctors reportedly sent the boy home without any clinical attention, as an alternative asking the members of the family to look at the dog for 10 days. The circle of relatives went again to the sanatorium five days later, reporting that the dog had disappeared from the locality. It used to be most effective then that the boy used to be given an anti-rabies shot. He took anti-rabies shots for 10 days, but Dinanath’s condition saved deteriorating. He used to be taken to Beliaghata’s ID Hospital on August 7, the place he died two days later of rabies.
Since then, his circle of relatives has been running from pillar to post to get justice. They moved the Hooghly Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum days after the boy’s death. But the attraction used to be dismissed on the ground that Dinanath used to be now not a consumer, as he used to be availing himself of unfastened remedy. A fresh petition used to be filed with the state shopper court in 1998, the place Rs 2 lakh repayment used to be awarded. But the state government challenged this at the National Consumer Redressal Forum. The apex shopper court noticed that this used to be a are compatible case for repayment, but dismissed the repayment and the case, citing the same topic may just now not be raised once more, because it had already been dismissed by the district shopper forum.
The circle of relatives, alternatively, didn't accept defeat. After consulting felony mavens, it filed every other petition with the state shopper court in 2012, this time citing a 1995 Supreme Court observation that “unfastened provider would also be a provider and the recipient a consumer”. The topic used to be sent again to the district.
“After a large number of hearings, the consumer forum on Wednesday directed the sanatorium to pay the repayment amount, in conjunction with Rs 10,000 as litigation charges to the sufferer’s circle of relatives inside of a month. The circle of relatives fought a protracted combat, all through which they had to run from pillar to post to get justice,” stated Parthapratm Dasgupta of the Association for Protection of Democratic Rights, who represented the case on behalf of the sufferer’s circle of relatives.
Earlier, a professional committee on the case by the state human rights fee had stated that the vaccine used to be useless, because it had now not been preserved correctly (it were saved at room temperature), and Dinanath had now not been given the proper dose. On Wednesday, the consumer court cited this file whilst awarding the repayment. “We are yet to get a duplicate of the order. We will speak about the problem with upper officers when we get the order and take a decision,” stated Dr Subhrangshu Chakraborty, the Hooghly CMOH.
“Justice has come overdue but we're satisfied that it has now not been denied,” stated Dinanath’s uncle, Shankar Chowdhury. “My brother (the boy’s father) died this January, waiting for justice. He had develop into depressed after his son’s death. He would had been happiest nowadays.”
22 years after death, hospital to pay Rs 19L
![22 years after death, hospital to pay Rs 19L]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
June 21, 2018
Rating:
