ORDER :

1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Delay condoned.

3. These two appeals since filed against the common impugned order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (in short, "the National Commission"), we took up these appeals together.

4. In Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) .....CC No. 12025 of 2014, the appellant - Manipal Hospital, Bangalore assailed order dated 22.5.2013 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in First Appeal No. 275 of 2007 allowing a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant whereas in Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition(C) No.35632 of 2013, the complainants dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, preferred this appeal for increase in compensation.

5. The facts in a nutshell are that complainants took their two years old daughter, who was suffering from normal cold and cough, to Dr.Arvind Shenoy, Consultant Pediatric, who after giving treatment for few days, advised for her admission to M/s. Manipal Hospital Bangalore (in short, "the Hospital"). On admission, she was taken to pediatric intensive care unit and diagnosed that she was suffering from cold and cough as well as from pneumonia. She was given intravenous fluids by inserting needle on the dorsal aspect of right wrist from August 26, 2002 to August 28, 2002. However, the baby developed gangrene initially in the finger tips, which spread to the portion of the hand below writs joint, due to blockage of blood supply. It is contended on behalf of complainants (parents of the baby) that Hospital Doctors conducted Angiogram and confirmed that there was complete blockage of blood supply to the right forearm and they conducted operation on the right forearm to restore blood supply but the same could not be restored and, eventually, the daughter of the complainants had to lose her right forearm. It is alleged that the complainants, thereafter, came to know that the needle was wrongly inserted into artery instead of vein due to which the blood supply was blocked.

6. The complainants were shocked and highly dismayed at the conduct of the hospital Doctors, who had admitted their daughter for treating cough, cold and fever and now she was on the brink of losing her hand due to utter negligence of the Hospital and their Doctors. The complainants-Parents did not agree for the amputation as the child was merely two years old at that time. It is alleged that Dr. Vasudeva Rao, Vascular Surgeon of the Hospital, even threatened and forced the parents to give their consent for amputation on the pretext that any delay would endanger the life of child. Thus imputing the opposite parties i.e. the Hospital and the concerned Doctors, complainants filed a complaint before the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore (in short, "the State Commission") praying for grant of compensation of Rs.One crore.

7. The State Commission, after considering the evidence, recorded a finding of negligence against the staff of the Hospital. The State Commission found that the Hospital has not produced any evidence or medical literature to show that the explanation given by the Hospital is acceptable. The State Commission also found that there was no clear-cut proof as to who is the main person who did the cannulation, due to which gangrene developed and the right arm was amputated. Accordingly, the State Commission awarded compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.

8. Against the order of the State Commission, two separate appeals have been filed, one by the Hospital challenging the order passed by the State Commission and another by the Complainants for enhancement of the compensation. Both appeals were disposed of by the National Commission by passing the common impugned order.

9. The National Commission re-appreciated the entire facts and the evidence on record. The National Commission has gone through the medical texts, literature and reviews and the way of treatment giv