Doctors Cannot Be Held Liable Without Reliable Evidence Of Medical Negligence: Delhi District Commission
The Delhi District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission has dismissed a case of medical negligence against Employee State Insurance hospital and its surgeons for an unsuccessful tubectomy operation. The bench observed that in the absence of any medical expert evidence, no negligence can be attributed to the doctors. It also emphasized on the possibilities of unwanted pregnancies...
The Delhi District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission has dismissed a case of medical negligence against Employee State Insurance hospital and its surgeons for an unsuccessful tubectomy operation. The bench observed that in the absence of any medical expert evidence, no negligence can be attributed to the doctors. It also emphasized on the possibilities of unwanted pregnancies despite taking all precautions since sterilization processes are not 100% safe and secure.
Case in brief:
The complainant underwent a surgery for tubectomy at Employee State Insurance hospital. Since the earlier tubectomy was unsuccessful, the complainant had to undergo the surgery again. It was stated that the complainant has been facing several complications since the surgery and was not keeping in good health. The complainant raised the issue of medical negligence by the hospital. It was stated that as per Manual for Family planning Insurance scheme, the Directorate of Family planning was to provide Rs. 30,000 as compensation for failure of sterilization process. The complainant brought the issue to the notice of the hospital authorities demanding the said compensation. However, the hospital refused to disburse the claim amount on various grounds. Despite repeated visits and communications for grant of compensation, the request of the complainant fell on deaf ears. This led to the complainant filing a complaint before the consumer forum.
The hospital argued that it has a reputation for delivering family planning services with well qualified and experienced doctors. Incidence of failure of laparoscopic sterilization was observed in 7 out of 1000 cases. It was further stated that all necessary precautions were taken hence, there is no negligence on the part of the hospital.
Observations:
The bench observed as under:
1. The complainant sought reimbursement in the year 2014 as per manual for Family planning insurance scheme 2008. However, the complainant has failed to provide any document which would show that the Manual of 2008 is also applicable in year 2014.
2. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs Shiv Ram & ors. It was observed by the Apex Court that no case of medical negligence can be sustained merely because of failure of sterilization unless supported by some cogent expert evidence.
3. The bench also relied on the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in Kamla Kesharwani vs Superintendent Shyamshah Medical college. It was observed that the methods of sterilization so far known to medical science which are most popular and prevalent are not 100% safe and secure. Even after successful operations without any negligence, there can be pregnancies due to natural causes.
4. The bench held that since the complainant failed to place on record any reliable evidence which might prove medical negligence on the part of treating surgeon, there is no deficiency in service.
Hence, the complaint was dismissed for being devoid of any merit.
Case name: Laxmi vs ESI hospital and ors.
Case number: CC 244/2017 [Delhi district commission, North-West]
Date of decision: 25.11.2024