NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Mr. Siddharth Mittal, J
Manmohan Kaur v. Fortis Hospital
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. medical negligence alleged in colonoscopy. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents contest allegations of negligence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court examines informed consent principle. (Para 6 , 8 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. informed consent not adequately proven. (Para 7 , 16 , 19) |
| 5. compensation awarded due to lack of informed consent. (Para 24 , 25) |
1. The challenge in this First Appeal, under S.19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act), by the Complainant, is to the order, dated 7.9.2015, passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chandigarh (for short the State Commission), in Consumer Complaint No. 58 of 2013. By the impugned order, the State Commission has dismissed the Complaint, holding that there was no inter alia, negligence on the part of Respondent No. 2 / Opposite Party No. 3 in the Complaint, while performing colonoscopy procedure on the Complainant.
2. Succinctly put, the facts, giving rise to the present Appeal, as culled out from the Complaint, are as follows:
2.1 In the month of December, 2006, the Complainant, a lady, aged about 55 years, started having stomach pain and disorder in the digestive system (irritation in the stomach /
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.