SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(SC) 335

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. SATHASIVAM, CJI., RANJAN GOGOI, N.V. RAMANA, JJ.
ASHISH KUMAR MAZUMDAR – APPELLANTS
VERSUS
AISHI RAM BATRA CHARITABLE HOSPITAL TRUST & ORS. – RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4010 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4011-4012 of 2010
Decided On : 22-04-2014

IMPORTANT POINT
Maxim of res ipsa loquitur has been correctly applied.

Headnote:Maxim – Res ipsa loquitur – Where facts proved by plaintiff – Call for explanation from defendant – Plaintiff need not allege and prove any specific act or omission of the defendant – Courts below correctly applying the maxim – No infirmity. (Para 8)

       (1865) 3 H & C 596; (1974) 1 SCC 690 – Relied upon

       Administration of Justice – Judicial Review – Concurrent finding of negligence on part of defendant – Should not be disturbed. (Para 10)

       Facts of the case:

       This is a case claiming damages for medical negligence.

       One Ashish Kumar Mazumdar, the plaintiff, filed a suit for damages for medical negligence against Batra Hospital, Delhi. The suit was decreed by Single Judge of the High Court awarding a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs with interest @ 12% per annum.

       This was challenged in appeal by the defendant in the suit i.e. the trust managing the hospital. The plaintiff had also filed a separate appeal challenging the quantum of damages awarded and seeking enhancement thereof.

       The Division Bench of the High Court by a common order dismissed the appeal filed by the defendant trust and allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff enhancing the amount of damages awarded from Rs. 7 lakhs to Rs. 11 lakhs alongwith interest @ 12% per annum.

       Not satisfied, both the parties have filed Civil Appeals.

       Finding of the Court:

       There is no infirmity in the concurrent findings of the courts below.

       Result: Both the appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

RANJAN GOGOI, J. –

1. Suit No. 3413 of 1991 filed by one Ashish Kumar Mazumdar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the plaintiff’) was decreed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi awarding a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs with interest @ 12% per annum on account of damages for injuries suffered by the plaintiff while undergoing treatment in the Batra Hospital, Delhi. The aforesaid judgment and decree passed on 02.12.2008 was challenged in appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court by the defendant in the suit i.e. the trust managing the hospital (hereinafter referred to as ‘the defendant’). The plaintiff had also filed a separate appeal challenging the quantum of damages awarded and seeking enhancement thereof. The Division Bench of the High Court by a common order dated 23.12.2009 dismissed the appeal filed by the defendant trust and allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff enhancing the amount of damages awarded from Rs. 7 lakhs to Rs. 11 lakhs alongwith interest @ 12% per annum. Not satisfied, the plaintiff has filed Civil Appeal No.4010 of 2010, whereas aggrieved by the dismissal of its appeal, the defendant trust has filed the connected appeals (Civil Appeal Nos. 4011- 4012 of 2010).

2. We have heard Mr. S.B. Upadhyay, learned senior counsel for the plaintiff and Mr. S.S. Khanjuda, learned counsel for the defendant.

3. According to the plaintiff, he was admitted as an indoor patient in the Batra Hospital on 27.10.1988 and was lodged in Room No.305 on the third floor of the hospital. He was running high fever and was in a delirious state. In the night intervening 31.10.1988 and 01.11.1988, at about 2.20 a.m., the plaintiff’s sister, one Kajal, who was staying with him in the room had noticed the absence of the plaintiff from the room. She promptly informed the staff nurse on duty and a search was conducted to trace out the plaintiff in the course of which a security guard, Hans Raj, found the plaintiff lying on the ground floor in the oncology gallery of the hospital and at a distance of 50 yards from a point immediately below the window of room No. 305. The plaintiff suffered multiple fracture of lumbar vertebrae with complete dislocation of the spinal cord and despite treatment he became a paraplegic i.e. 100% disabled below the waist. Though the plaint is silent on the circumstances in which the injuries were caused or the manner in which the same were sustained, according to the plaintiff, as at the time of the incident he was an indoor patient in the hospital it was the duty and responsibility of the hospital authorities to take care of the plaintiff who was suffering from high fever and was in a delirious state. The plaintiff had alleged that it is on account of the absence of due and reasonable care on the part of the hospital authorities that the incident could occur disabling the plaintiff for the rest of his life. According to the plaintiff though the injuries suffered by him had not immediately affected his employment as a Junior Assistant in Punjab National Bank the same had severely affected his service prospects. Accordingly, the suit in question was filed seeking damages to the extent of Rs. 58 lakhs; the claim, however, was restricted to Rs. 25 lakhs on account of the plaintiff’s inability to pay the requisite court fee on the rest of the amount.

4. The defendant trust, in its written statement, took the stand that the hospital had permitted the plaintiff’s sister to stay in the room as an attendant and that the plaintiff had himself jumped out of the window of his room despite the presence of his sister leading to the injuries suffered. On the said broad facts the defendant denied the allegation of negligence and absence of due care on its part as claimed by the plaintiff in the suit.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Trial Judge framed four issues for trial in the suit.









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top