Skip to main content

Compensation of Rs. 20 lakh awarded in a case of death due to medical negligence

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): While holding Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (PGI), Chandigarh guilty of medical negligence, NCDRC upheld the order of Chandigarh State Commission and also enhanced the total compensation from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 20 lakh in case of death of a girl due to delay in treatment. The Commission was hearing an appeal filed by the parents of the deceased challenging the order of Chandigarh State Commission vide which the Institute was directed to pay Rs 7 lakh and Chandigarh Transport Undertaking (CTU) to pay Rs 3 lakh to them. The parents of the deceased approached NCDRC for enhancement of compensation awarded by the State Commission. PGI, Chandigarh had also filed appeal before Commission in the matter. The facts of the case are that a schoolgirl aged about 16 years, on her way from her school to residence was crushed by a CTU bus when she was attempting to board it in July 2012. She was admitted into Advance Trauma Centre (ATC) of PGI, Chandigarh. Due to medical negligence and incompetence, her leg got infected and her left lower limb was amputated in an attempt to prevent the gangrene from spreading to other parts of the body. Later as the doctors of the Institute failed to check or control the spread of gangrene, it led to untimely death of the girl. The parents had alleged that the girl died due to delay in proper treatment and negligence on the part of the doctors of the Institute. In its defense, Institute submitted that the deceased was planned for surgery at the time of admission itself, but the procedure was delayed due to heavy rush of patients in the hospital. After perusing the material on record, which included report provided by eminent doctors in the case and hearing both the parties, NCDRC held the Institute guilty for medical negligence and noted that, “It may be pertinent to note that O.P.No.1-Hospital is a prestigious medical institute. Therefore, it is expected from such institute that it should work not in a purely bureaucratic manner i.e. patient should be treated as per seniority in the queue, but it should be run in a professional manner. The medical surgeries, operations and other emergency treatments are to be administered keeping in view the nature of ailment, seriousness and other exigencies as per the best judgment of the treating doctor. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that condition of the patient was quite serious from the time she was admitted in the Hospital. Keeping in view the nature of ailment from which the patient was suffering, O.P. No.1-Hospital should not have insisted on red  tapism.  On the other hand, it is really unfortunate that due to the bureaucratic approach and red tapism adopted by O.P. No.1-Hospital, a precious life of young girl could not be saved.” While upholding the order of State Commission, NCDRC dismissed the appeal filed by the Institute and increased the amount of compensation in the matter. “We deem it appropriate to award a further sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) to the appellants, since they have to bear with all  the trauma, mental agony, pain and sufferings, throughout their remaining life,” NCDRC noted. [Amit Sarkar v. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, 2015 SCC OnLine NCDRC 13, decided on 21.05.2015]

 Article referred: http://blog.scconline.com/post/2015/06/04/compensation-of-rs-20-lakh-awarded-in-a-case-of-death-due-to-medical-negligence.aspx

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there
Post a Comment
Read more

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t
Post a Comment
Read more

Jurisdiction of consumer forum is not ousted even if the other party has filed suit on the same matter in Civil Court

In Yashwant Rama Jadhav v. Shaukat Hussain Shaikh, First Appeal No. 1229 of 2017, decided on 18.11.2017,  the grievance of the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was that appellants/complainants had entered into agreements with the respondents for purchase of residential flats, which the respondents were to construct and despite paying the substantial amount to the respondents, the construction of the flats had not been completed. The State Commission dismissed the complaints and ruled in favor of respondents against which the appellants approached the National Commission. The NCDRC held that Section ‘3’ of the Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant provides that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Thus the remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy, which Parliament has made available to a consumer. Even
Post a Comment
Read more