Medical negligence requires clear evidence of fault; informed consent negates liability if risks are disclosed.

1. This Order shall decide both the First Appeals arising from the impugned Judgment / Order dated 26.11.2012 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (hereinafter referred to as the "State Commission") in Consumer Complaint No. 24/2006, wherein the State Commission allowed the complaint and awarded Rs.6 lakh compensation to be paid by all the OPs.

2. For the convenience the parties are referred to be as in the Complaint before the State Commission.

3. The Complainants are legal heirs of deceased Smt. Asha Rani Gurdhar. The Opposite Parties are OP - 1 - Kakkar Maternity and Nursing Home (OP - 1), Dr. Rajesh Kakkar (OP - 2), Dr. Abhishek Kakkar (OP - 3) and Dr. Sunil Bajaj - The Medical Officer of Kakkar Hospital (OP - 4). Dr. Anant Ram Janta Hospital Barwala (OP - 5) and Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, New Delhi (OP - 6), both were impleaded as a proforma party.

4. Brief facts that, since June 2005 Smt. Asha Rani Girdhar (hereinafter referred to be as the 'patient') aged about 54 years was suffering from abdominal pain. On 14.12.2005 she consulted Rajesh Kakkar's Maternity & Nursing Home (OP - 1), Fatehabad. The USG revealed left Renal Calculi (stones) and on 2.3.2006 she was operated under General Anesthesia (GA) by Dr. Sunil Bajaj, Dr. Abhishek Kakkar and Dr. Rajesh Kakkar (OP Nos. 2-4 respectively). After surgery, within 10 minutes the patient felt breathing difficulties, missing pulse and the eyes stopped blinking. The Complainant alleged that the OP - hospital has no ICU facility, no Oxygen and Ventilator. On the next day 3.3.2006 Dr. Anant Ram (OP - 5) was called from Barwala who advised to shift the patient to Apollo Hospital, Delhi (OP - 6). On the next day the Patient was admitted to OP - 6 but she could not recover and due to multi organ failure died on 6.4.2006. Under S.304 - A IPC, an FIR was registered in Police Station, Tohana. The Complainants filed Consumer Complaint No. 24, 2006 against the OPs - 1 to 5 for alleged medical negligence and prayed compensation to the tune of Rs.29,00,000

5. The OPs - 1 to 3 filed their respective written version, denied any negligence during treatment of the patient. The OP - 1 further submitted the Expert Medical Board Report of Doctors of PGIMS Rohtak vide dated 31.5.2007 wherein the Board of Doctors have denied any kind of medical negligence or carelessness in treating the patient. The OPs - 4 and 6 were proceeded against ex parte.

6. After considering the submission and evidence the State Commission partly allowed the complaint against all the OPs and awarded Compensation to the tune of Rs.6 lakh to be paid by all the OPs.

7. Being aggrieved, the OP - 6 - Indraprastha Apollo Hospital & OP 5 - Dr. Anant Ram have filed First Appeal Nos. 61 and 194 of 2013 respectively.

8. Heard the arguments from the Parties.

9. The crux of this matter is whether the Appellants (OPs 5 and 6) were liable to pay compensation as awarded by the State Commission as they were only proforma parties in the complaint.

10. I have perused the record. It is pertinent to note that the Appellant / OP 5 - Dr. Anant Ram has neither performed the operation nor was he in any way associated pre or post - operative period. He has only facilitated patient shifting to a better hospital at Delhi. There was no negligence attributed to Dr. Anant Ram. The Appellant / OP - 6 was impleaded as a proforma party in the complaint for the production of medical records of the patient during the period of her admission.

11. I have perused the Expert Opinion. It is evident that Mrs. Girdhar was an obese lady and had uncontrolled hypertension (high blood pr