Back
GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AHMEDABAD
XYZ, J
Bhailal Amin General Hospital – Appellant
Versus
original complainant – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and grievance against the hospital for negligence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments made by both parties regarding the alleged negligence and compensation. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. discussion on legal principles of medical negligence and vicarious liability. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. final ruling regarding the dismissal of the appeal and confirmation of the lower court's decision. (Para 22) |
1. ”Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order rendered by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Vadodara (Add.) on 13.5.2013 in Complaint No. 986 of 2007 the original opponent No. 1 has filed the present Appeal under S.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before this Commission. For the sake of the convenience, parties are hereinafter referred to by their original nomenclature.
2. The facts which led the appellant to file this Appeal in a nutshell are as under: It is the case of the complainant that on account of sudden chest pain he has undergone for the Angiography on date 20.2.2007 as advised by doctor of Bankers Heart Institute and as a result he came to know that there was a b
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
