Healthcare providers must adhere to the standard of care associated with their qualifications, reinforcing medical negligence principles.

1. The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioners against Respondents as detailed above, under S.21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , against the order dated 20.12.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission'), in First Appeal (FA) No. 328 of 2009 in which order dated 30.3.2009 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shekh Sarai, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint (CC) No. DF - VII / 923/08 was challenged, inter alia praying for setting aside / reversing the judgment and order dated 20.12.2017 passed by the State Commission in FA / 328/009 and also judgment and order dated 30.3.2009 passed by District Forum - VII, Shekh Sarai in CC No. 923/2008 dismissing the complaint filed by Respondent No. 1.

2. Notice was issued to the Respondents on 4.5.2018. The operation of the impugned order qua the petitioners was stayed subject to deposit of Rs. 1,00,000 with the state Commission. Petitioners filed their Written Arguments / Synopsis on 26.11.2021 and Respondent No. 1 filed his written arguments / synopsis on 26.7.2023.

3. Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the RP, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Forum and other case records are that on 20.5.2007, Sh. Om Prakash, the father of complainant was brought to the hospital of the petitioners at 12 PM with abdominal pain. The patient was not attended till 2.00 p.m. After 2.00 p.m.., Respondent No. 2 prescribed medicines and the condition of the patient deteriorated around 5-10 P.M. and Dr. Ajay Singh Pundeer, Petitioner No. 1 was called at 5.45 p.m. but ultimately the patient collapsed and expired at 6.00 p.m. due to cardiac arrest. The complainant filed complaint before the District Forum alleging that the father of the complainant died on 20.5.2007 due to willful and intentional negligence of the OPs. The complainant alleged that the father of the complainant was not attended by the OPs nor he was given any treatment for two hours. Thereafter, Respondent No. 2 attended the patient and given some medicines but there was no response. It is alleged that the Respondent No. 2 introduces himself as MBBS but in fact he does not hold any degree of MBBS and he is BAMS and is not even registered with the competent authority. Respondent No. 2 was not even entitled to prescribe treatment as per the complications arisen in E.C.G. taken at 2.00 p.m. Respondent No. 2 called another doctor at 5.45 p.m. The condition of the patient deteriorated and the other doctor OP - 1 was called and ultimately the father of complainant died at 6.00 p.m. The complainants filed complaint before the District Forum alleging that his father had not been given proper treatment by the OPs. Dr. Pundeer, who himself was not specialist and the OP - 2 called Dr. Pundeer when the condition of father of complainant deteriorated. No proper treatment throughout the day was given to the father of complainant by the OPs and the OPs neither sent the patient to ICU nor called any competent or specialist doctor for treatment. OP - 2 was doctor of Ayurveda but was prescribing medicine of Allopathy, which clearly violated the guidelines and directions / orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. On enquiry by the Police, it was revealed that the OPs were not the branch of renowned Metro Plus Hospital which has specialization in heart diseases. The father of the complainant had also suffered heart trouble which treatment was never give