Issue

Back
April 2022

Anaesthetist records irrelevant facts that are not normally mentioned – Court observes it “doctor is trying to escape from his liability”

Babubhai Laxmanbhai Parmar  v/s Jivan jyot Charitable Trust & Anr.
15MLCD (j131) | Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad
Judgement in favour of: Patient


Madras High Court issues guidelines to Medical Council that should be followed in complaints of misconduct against doctors

Dr. P. Basumani v/s The Tamil Nadu Medical Council
15MLCD (j138) | Madras High Court, Chennai
Judgement in favour of: Doctor


Taking insurance policy for hospitals – Reading between the lines required

United India Ins. Co. Ltd. v/s The Medical Officer & Ors. 
15MLCD (j150) | Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad
Judgement in favour of: Patient


Hospitals claim to have treated the patient for URTI and LRTI only a ploy to “claim higher bills from insurance” under “package component” alleges patient

K.V. Ramani v/s Sterling Hospital & Ors.
15MLCD (j155) | Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad
Judgement in favour of: Patient


Patient misdiagnosed, treated 3 years for TB due to wrong biopsy report - Court enhances compensation, takes 'mental agony' into account

Umesh Khapabhai Ahir v/s Dr. Rajesh Saxsena & Anr.
15MLCD (j160) | Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad
Judgement in favour of: Patient


Court holds doctors negligent for failure to diagnose the complaints / complications despite knowing patients medical history

Gurjeet Singh & Anr. v/s Dr. Abhishek Bansal & Ors.
15MLCD (j163) | Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh
Judgement in favour of: Patient


Is recurrence of kidney stone 2 years after surgical removal negligence? Court says no

Dr. H. S. Tiwari v/s Nankau
15MLCD (j169) | Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow
Judgement in favour of: Doctor


Court refuses to admit complaint of negligence observing that end result of advanced cancer is known and the allegations were vague

Ashok Pandurang Surve v/s Tata Memorial Hospital & Ors.
15MLCD (j171) | Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai
Judgement in favour of: Doctor


 Know Your MLCD
    From the Editors Desk
  • Handing Over The Baton – Welcome Dr. Shreekant Shetty, our new Editor

    Read
  • What are the changes that have happened in your journal?

    Read
  • We want you to be acquainted with both sides of the coin

    Read
  • How is this journal made?

    Read
  • How to get the maximum out of this journal

    Read
  • Is this journal the need of the hour?

    Read
  • The First Editorial

    Read

  • Publishes ‘real time judgments’ on medical negligence from higher courts
  • Every judgment is further summarized in simple, non-legal language
  • Comprehensively guides a doctor on avoiding MedLegal issues
  • Suggests practically useful ‘Do’s & Don’ts’ in day-to-day practice
  • Cases selected / analyzed solely from a doctor’s viewpoint
Testimonials FAQs Get Complimentary Copy