Back
R. K. AGRAWAL, S. M. KANTIKAR
SGT Chaman Lal – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER
Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Member—The instant Appeal is preferred by the Appellants under Section 19(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’) against the impugned Order dated 16.12.2013, passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), wherein the Complaint was dismissed.
Brief facts:
2. The appellant / Complainant Mr. Chaman Lal joined the Indian Air Force as an airman in Clerk General Duties (CGD) trade on 12.10.1987. He was promoted from time to time and became Sergeant in 1998 and according to him, he has unblemished service record of 15 years. Due to health issues, he was reported sick several times at the Air Force Station, New Delhi. In March, 2001, he had symptoms of pain (off & on) in the upper end of Rt. Tibia. He was treated by the Air Force doctors and specialists of Base Hospital Delhi Cantt., but got temporary relief by painkillers. The Appellant got MRI Scan for his right leg at Max Medical Centre at his own expense on 26.08.2001. That revealed some abnormality with right tibia bone as sign of malignancy in the right knee. He was, thereafter, on 31.08.2001, admitted in the Army Ho
Joint replacement surgery — There was radiological & MRI evidence of residual tumour at the affected leg; the team of doctors of Oncology, Joint replacement surgery and Radiotherapy took a joint deci....
Medical practitioners are not liable for negligence if treatment adheres to established medical standards and thorough investigations are conducted resulting in correct diagnoses.
(1) Primary treatment - The OP’s duty was limited to primary treatment or proper referral, but he started ATT and same was stopped within few days and again restarted without any justification.(2) Ti....
Negligence in treatment of Osteosarcoma, ruled out, since treatment plan was correct as per standard of practice.
Death of Patient - Thus by any stretch of imagination was no co-relation between the tuberculosis, renal transplant and septicemia. The death was neither due to Tuberculosis nor by renal transplantat....
Medical negligence – Negligence cannot be attributed to a Doctor so long as he performs his duties with reasonable skill and competence.
Negligence in medical treatment must be proven with concrete evidence, and mere adverse outcomes do not imply failure of care.
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
