Skip to main content

Mumbai doctors to pay Rs 5 lakh for fatal injection

A consumer forum has directed a doctor and another surgeon who contributed to negligence to pay a compensation of Rs 5 lakh to the father of a man who was administered an injection for fever, which proved fatal.

Prabhakar Kudtudkar, a carpenter from Govandi, had complained to the Additional Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in March 2008. His son Pravin noticed a heavy swelling on his buttock after Dr Kiran Gawade administered the injection on December 24, 2007. The doctor referred him to Dr Atul Chirmade of Khedekar's Diamond Nursing Home, Chembur. The father said that without the family's consent, Chirmade performed a surgery on Pravin, leading to complications. Chirmade then arranged for an ambulance without an oxygen cylinder and sought the patient's transfer to Sion Hospital. Pravin died on the way, prompting his father to register a police complaint and file a complaint with the forum.

Denying negligence, Gawade contended that a day after administering the injection, Pravin told her that he was unwell and went out in search of work. At noon, he felt unwell again and went to another doctor, who administered another injection. The surgeon said Pravin's post-mortem report showed the death had no connection with the treatment.

But the forum said Gawade had failed to prove that the patient took treatment from another doctor, who administered a second injection. The forum said Pravin had to lose his life as there was puss formation and gas gangrene due to the manner in which she had administered the injection. While explaining Chirmade's culpability, the forum said it did not fault the manner in which the surgery was performed. But it said that it failed to understand why Pravin was hurriedly shifted to Sion Hospital when he was under the shadow of death. "If the doctors wanted to shift him in such a critical condition, it was their bounding duty to provide sufficient safety measures like an oxygen cylinder and skilled doctor and nurses. The failure to do this leaves no doubt in our mind to conclude that the act amounts to medical negligence," it observed.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Mumbai-doctors-to-pay-Rs-5-lakh-for-fatal-injection/articleshow/39000655.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Loss of earning capacity, and not percentage of disability, must decide compensation, says HC

While computing compensation claims of accident victims, the victim's loss of earning capacity shall outweigh the percentage/extent of his disability, the Madras high court has felt. Justice R Mahadevan, enhancing the compensation payable to an injured driver by Rs 2 lakh, said: "In cases for compensation, it is not the disability, which is partial or total, alone that matters, it is the loss in earning capacity as a result of accident that is to be considered." R Murali, driver of a mixed concrete vehicle, met with an accident in January 2009 and suffered injuries in hip, right leg and ankle. He claimed loss of 100% earning capacity and sought appropriate compensation along with 12% interest rate. However, as the disability certificate issued by a doctor pegged the percentage of his disability at 60%, the deputy commissioner of labour-II, awarded Rs 3.12 lakh as compensation, by fixing the monthly income at Rs 4,000. Aggrieved by the poor package, Murali filed the...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 138 NI Act: Omission To Mention Nature Of Debt Or Liability In Notice Does Not Render It Invalid

In Crl.MC.No. 3289 of 2015, B.SURENDRA DAS vs STATE OF KERALA, the court was considering a petition seeking to quash the criminal proceedings on the ground that no demand for payment of the amount of the cheque was made by the complainant as per the notice sent by him and therefore, the notice is defective and the proceedings initiated against the accused pursuant to such notice cannot be sustained. The court observed that there is no statutory requirement that the complainant must specifically allege in the complaint that there was a subsisting liability. All the complainant has to do is to raise a demand for payment which is a notice to the debtor giving him time to pay but there is no format in which the notice is to be sent.
Post a Comment
Read more