Reversal of Consumer Court Order in Medical Negligence Case.


14 October 2024 Civil Revision >> Civil & Consumer Law   |   Medical Negligence >> Consumer Rights  

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) heard a revision petition filed by Dhiraj Kaushik against an order by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana. The State Commission had overturned the District Commission's decision, which had initially ruled in favor of Kaushik in a consumer complaint alleging medical negligence.

Kaushik's complaint (CC/209/2009) before the District Commission claimed deficiency in service by Aneja Hospital and Nursing Home and Dr. R.K. Aneja. He alleged that despite undergoing surgery at the hospital in March-April 2005 for the removal of gallstones and a damaged gallbladder, he continued to experience pain. He was later informed at Fortis Hospital in 2008 that his gallbladder still needed to be removed, leading him to believe that the initial surgery was not performed correctly despite the charges. He sought compensation for this alleged negligence.


 

 

The District Commission initially found Dr. R.K. Aneja liable for deficiency in service and directed him to pay Rs. 442,790 with interest, with his insurance company (United India Insurance Company Ltd.) to indemnify him up to Rs. 5 lakhs.

However, the State Commission allowed the appeal filed by the opposite parties (including Dr. Aneja and the hospital), set aside the District Commission's order, and dismissed Kaushik's complaint. This led Kaushik to file the present revision petition before the NCDRC.

The NCDRC, after hearing the arguments and reviewing the records, focused on a separate case (Revision Petition related to parking space in a housing society) in its detailed reasoning (paragraphs 9-12). In that unrelated case, the NCDRC upheld the concurrent findings of the District Commission and the State Commission regarding the allotment of parking space based on the sale deed, dismissing the argument that voluminous evidence was required. The NCDRC cited Supreme Court judgments supporting the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction when there are concurrent findings of fact.

Ultimately, the NCDRC's order, based on the "aforesaid discussions" (which heavily focused on the unrelated parking dispute), dismissed Dhiraj Kaushik's revision petition against the State Commission's order in the medical negligence case. The reason for this dismissal in the context of the medical negligence allegations is not explicitly detailed in the provided text, as the reasoning section primarily discusses the principles established in the unrelated parking dispute.


  Consumer Protection Act, 1986