Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Medical Negligence – Failed Cataract Surgery – Loss of Vision – Post-Operative Care – Expert Medical Opinion favouring the Appellant considered – No evidence available on record to shift the blame to Appellant: Held: The Appellant underwent cataract surgery performed by the Respondent – Post-surgery, the Appellant visited the Respondent five times within a week, reporting severe eye pain, oozing pus, headaches, and vision loss – Despite these complaints, the Respondent repeatedly re assured the Appellant that the surgery was successful and prescribed painkillers – Seeking further medical advice, the Appellant consulted two other doctors and was admitted to Wanawadi Military Hospital, where he was diagnosed with endophthalmitis (a severe eye infection) – Urgent surgery was performed to prevent potential brain damage, but the Appellant lost complete vision in his right eye – The Appellant filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Pune, alleging medical negligence and seeking compensation – The District Forum dismissed the complaint due to lack of expert evidence – The State Consumer Commission of Maharashtra partly allowed the appeal, holding the Respondent guilty of medical negligence and awarding compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- – The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) reversed the State Commission's decision, holding that the Appellant had changed his own bandage, leading to the infection, and thus, the Respondent was not negligent – That the Respondent failed to diagnose and treat the infection in the Appellant's eye despite multiple complaints of pain and vision loss – This Hon’ble Court rejected the NCDRC's finding that the Appellant's actions (changing his own bandage) caused the infection, noting that there was no evidence brought on record to support this claim – The Court restored the State Commission's judgment, directing the Respondent to pay the Appellant compensation of Rs. 350,000 within two months, with a 12% per annum interest rate applicable in case of default. [Paras 6, 8, 9, 15]
Res-Ipsa-Loquitor – Loss of vision result of medical negligence in post-operative care – Corrective steps not undertaken causing loss of vision:
Held: The Appellant's severe post-operative symptoms and the Respondent's failure to diagnose or treat the infection indicated negligence – Held, that the negligence was evident from the facts and that the Respondent failed to detect the infection and clear the same in time despite several complaints by the Appellant – The infection was diagnosed by the three doctors at the Military Hospital, but it was too late by then and the Appellant had to undergo evisceration of his right eye leading to loss of vision – This was a blatant result of medical negligence by the respondent in postoperative care wherein corrective steps could have been taken, if the most reasonable and basic skills which were expected from the Respondent, were applied – Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitor applied. [Paras 18, 23]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.