A medical professional is not liable for negligence if they have taken all reasonable steps to treat a patient and the patient's condition does not improve.

Mr. Justice D.R. Vithal Rao, President — In this complaint under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complainant has sought compensation in a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the opposite party Sri. Krishna Nursing Home, Bangalore.

2. It is the case of the complainant that his son Ashwin, aged about 10 years, suffered con tenuous vomiting in the night on 19.8.92 and so he was admitted to the opposite party-Nursing Home in the early hours of 20th August, 1992 for treatment. At the time of admission the fingers and legs of Ashwin had become stiffened. The opposite party Doctors immediately got Ashwin admitted in the Nursing Home given drips and other medicines. The condition of Ashwin did not improve inspite of administering injunctions and drips.

3. By about 12.30 p.m. the condition of the boy Ashwin became very critical and brain of Ashwin was not functioning properly. The opposite party Doctors administered certain medicines, even then the condition did not improve. The opposite party Doctors secured Paediatrician Dr. Prasad, who examined and suggested certain medicines. The opp. Party doctors administered the said medicines even then the condition of the boy Ashwin did not improve. So thereafter the opposite party Doctors secured Neurologist Dr. Suresh, who examined the patient Ashwin and suggested certain medicines even then the condition did not improve.

4. As per the advice of Dr. Prasad, Paediatrician by about 9.00 p.m. chest Ex-ray was taken. The opposite party Doctors advised to shift the patient to St. Johns Hospital for further treatment. The opposite party Doctors secured the Ambulance from St. Johns Medical College Hospital and while the patient was being shifted from the ward to the Ambulance the patient expired.

5. The complainant averred that the death of his son Ashwin was due to the gross negligence in giving treatment to the patient by the Doctors of the Nursing Home-opposite party and on that basis claimed compensation in a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/-from the opposite party.

6. The opposite party filed its version, admitted the fact that the patient Ashwin, son of the complainant, aged about 10 years was admitted to the Nursing Home at about 6.00 a.m. on 20th August, 1992 on being referred by Dr. Madhusudan. The patient was admitted with the problem of vomiting and mild breathlessness. The patient had the past history of repeated episodes of Bronchial asthma. The patient had earlier in the year 1990 taken treatment for Asthma in the said Nursing Home.

7. The opposite party further averred that the necessary medicines were given to the patient to control the vomiting and breathlessness. The opposite party Nursing Home had no ventilatory facility and so advised the complainant to shieft the patient to St. Johns Medical College Hospital. But the complainant asked the opposite party to continue treatment there itself. So the opposite party secured Paediatrician who examined the patient and advised certain medicines. Accordingly the medicine was administered. Even thereafter when the condition of the patient did not improve, a Neurologist was summoned and chest X-ray was taken and necessary treatment was given but the condition of the patient did not improve. So finally after 9.00 p.m. on that day the complainant was advised to shift the patient to St. Johns Medical College Hospital for further treatment. The complainant agreed for the same. So an Ambulance was secured from St. Johns Medical College Hospital and while the patient was being shifted from the ward to the Ambulance unfortunately the patient expired. The opposite party further averred that there was no negligence on their part in giving the treatment to the patient; necessary treatment was given, even Paediatrician and Neurologist were secured to examine the patient and as per their advice necessary medicines were administered but unfortunately the condition of the patient did not improve and while the patient was being shift