S.M.KANTIKAR, BINOY KUMAR
Daya Singh – Appellant
Versus
Shivi Digital X-Ray, Ultrasound, Colour Doppler and Mammography Centre – Respondent
ORDER
Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member.—The Petitioner has filed the instant revision petition filed under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the Order dated 26.11.2018 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula (for short the ‘State Commission’) in Appeal No. 434 of 2018, wherein the State Commission, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Petitioner.
2. The question involved herein is that whether failure to diagnose the urinary stone by Ultrasonography (USG) constitutes medical negligence?
3. Briefly stated the case of the Complainant / Petitioner is that on 31.08.2015, he suffered severe abdominal pain, and on his own got done an ultrasound from Shivi Digital X-Ray Ultrasound Coloured Doppler Mamography Centre (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Opposite Party No. 1’). The USG was reported as no calculus (stone), and there was no problem in the kidneys. However, he was getting regular abdominal pain. He consulted at M.M. Hospital, Mullana, Ambala. On 08.09.2015 at Aggarwal Digital X-Ray Center, 2nd USG was done which revealed 17 mm Calculus in the Renal Pelvis and 5-6 small Calculi. Thereafter, Dr. Sudhir Kapoor operated him
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.