SUBHASH CHANDRA, J. RAJENDRA
Raghuveer Singh – Appellant
Versus
Narayana Hridayalaya Ltd. (Narayana Multispecialty Hospital) – Respondent
ORDER
AVM J. Rajendra, AVSM, VSM (Retd.), Member—This Order shall decide both the appeals arising out from the impugned Judgment /Order dated 30.07.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in Complaint No. 157/2017, wherein the State Commission partly allowed the complaint.
2. For convenience, the parties are referred per the Complaint before the State Commission. Mr. Raghuveer Singh is referred as the Appellant/ Complainant in FA No. 1178/ 2019 and Narayana Hridayalaya Ltd. (Narayana Multispecialty Hospital) is referred as Opposite Party No. 1 (OP-1), Dr. Ankit Mathur is referred as OP-2 and Dr. Anshu Kabra (Cardiac Consultant) is referred as OP-3.
3. Brief facts of the case as per the Complainant are that he and his wife visited Soni Hospital for a routine check for her. As he had some dental issue, the Complaint consulted a dentist at the hospital. On inspection by the dentist, he was advised tooth extraction and scheduled the extraction for 23.03.2017 at the same Hospital.
4. On 23.03.2017 the Complainant reported to Soni Hospital for tooth extraction. However, during the procedure, he experie
Samira Kohli vs. Dr. Prabha Manchanda (2008) 2 SCC 1. (Para 12)
Arun Kumar Manglik vs. Chirayu Health and Medicare (P) Ltd.
Shoda Devi vs. DDU/Ripon Hospital and Ors
PB Desai vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr.
Jacob Mathew vs. State of Punjab
Spring Meadows Hospital and Anr. vs. Harjol Ahluwalia and Anr.
Dr. Laxman Balakrishna Joshi vs. Dr. Trimbak Bapu Godbole and Anr.
Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
Malay Kumar Ganguly vs. Sukumar Mukherjee and Ors.
Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences vs. Prasanth S. Dhananka and Ors.
Critical condition - If the patient was in a critical condition and he could not survive even after surgery, keeping that in mind the blame cannot be passed on to the Hospital and the Doctor who had ....
Negligence in medical treatment must be proven with concrete evidence, and mere adverse outcomes do not imply failure of care.
The duty of care in medical procedures requires proper monitoring of oxygen supply, and negligence occurs when these standards are not met, leading to patient harm.
Medical Negligence – Doctor is not to be held negligent simply because a mishap occurred.
(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....
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.