Medical negligence -- Both the appellants experienced and qualified surgeons capable of undertaking the treatment in question - Merely because some complications developed which led to the death of the patient by itself, is not sufficient to jump upon any conclusion regarding negligence on the part of appellants - In absence of any expert evidence it was not possible to..........
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d);, 2(1)(d) -- Consumer - Consumer dispute - Medical negligence - Appellant a Doctor in Government Hospital - The treatment and operation of the deceased boy done in Government District Hospital where no fee was charged for any such treatment - Complainant alleged that the fees was charged by the appellants at their residence -..........
Medical negligence -- Biopsy - Plea of appellant-complainant that his father was operated upon negligently for removal of lump and it was not a case of biopsy as large soft white mass about 9 cm. diameter was removed - As per medical literature extraction of piece can be as large as possible - Cannot be said 9 cm diameter piece would not fail in the definition of a piece..........
Medical negligence -- Surgery - Loss of finger - Surgery done on finger without ensuring that the patient's blood sugar level is in permissible limit held to be deficiency in service - Finger had to be amputated due to development of Gangrene later on - Contention of the petitioner that said surgery was never done and he only prescribed medicine for genital infection not..........
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 13 -- - Medical Negligence - In the order passed by the State Commission material evidence not discussed - Neither the post-mortem report nor the inquiry report, on which the State Commission has relied upon, has been proved - Held to be a case of failure of justice - Case remanded back to the State Commission with..........
Medical negligence -- Knee Surgery - Failure of - No expert examined by complainant to prove that the procedure adopted by OP was not procedure that could have been adopted or there was any negligent in the said procedure - OP just because the disease was hereditary in nature it does not mean that no surgery was required - Whether surgery was required or not is a matter..........
Medical negligence -- Res ipsa loquitur - Complainant who alleges medical negligence has to establish by adducing expert evidence in his favour to establish medical negligence on the part of OPs who is facing the complaint of medical negligence - Complainants are laymen - Their own affidavit will not serve the purpose to establish case of medical negligence against doctors..........
Medical negligence -- Complainant 8 months old child suffering from loose motions and vomiting admitted in hospitals of OPs - IV fluids through veins near elbow joint injected - Veins badly punctured resulted in gangrene - Right hand of the complainant above elbow joint was finally amputated - Complainant has clearly failed to establish that both doctors had not taken due..........
Medical negligence -- Fracture of leg - Patient advised to remain in hospital as there was need of continuous dressing and supervision but complainant left hospital at his own - He got re-admitted after 13 days when it was found that there was gross skin necrosis on the affected part of the leg with foul smell and pus discharge - No evidence of any expert led to prove or..........
Medical negligence -- Amputation of both legs which had developed gangrene - This was done to save the life of complainant after taking express consent of brother of the complainant - No effort made from the side of complainant to lead expert evidence in order to dislodge the evidence led from the side of OP No.1 - The complainant failed to establish that his legs..........
