Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, SANDEEP MEHTA
P. N. Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Rajinder Singh Dogra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This civil appeal arises out of the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressa1[Hereinafter referred to as the National Commission], Commission1 in First Appeal No. 248/2002 dated 16.07.2012. By the said order, the National Commission allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-consumer by setting aside the order passed by the UT Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh2[Hereinafter referred to as the State/UT Commission] and directed payment of compensation quantified at Rs. 7,00,000/- by the appellant, with 12% interest from the date of the order till actual payment. Questioning the decision of the National Commission, the appellant is before us. The brief facts necessary for deciding the appeal are as follows:
2. The respondent’s wife had been suffering from abdominal pain. She went through an ultrasonography test, which showed stones in her gall bladder. The appellant is a doctor, who performed a surgery for removing the stones on 11.09.2000 on the basis of an ultrasonography. However, the patient developed various problems after the same, such as stomach ache, constipation and vomiting, etc. The patient re-consulted the appellant, who prescribed
Medical professionals must adhere to established standards of care and obtain informed consent; failure to do so constitutes negligence.
(1) Medical negligence – In proceedings arising out of claim for compensation on the basis of medical negligence, opinion and findings of MCI regarding professional conduct of Doctor have great relev....
Bile - The doctors/staff on duty at Apollo Hospital failed to insert drainage tube, which could have accumulated the bile.
In medical negligence, res ipsa loquitur applies to unexplained post-surgical perforations shifting burden to prove non-negligence; doctor's death abates personal liability against heirs; hospital vi....
(1) Pancreatitis – Pancreatitis could be detected only much later but OPs cannot be held responsible.(2) Negligence – The patient’s treatment was based on from OP No.3, which further underscores negl....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
