The medical law reporters for Indian doctors
The medical law reporters for Indian doctors

Issue

 Back
October 2023

Doctor residing 140 km away from hospital absent for post-surgery care when the patient is critical is negligent – Whether a proper method of treatment was adopted or not is "irrelevant" observes court

Dr. Arup Laha v/s Dilip Hait & Anr.
16MLCD (j377) | West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata
Judgement in favour of: Patient

An “extremely rare occurrence” may not come to the “surgeon's mind” - National Consumer Commission accepts this expert opinion, absolves the doctor

Dr. Bhaskar Das & Anr. v/s Anjali Manna & Ors.
16MLCD (j382) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Government doctor performs an emergency appendectomy in a private hospital on humanitarian grounds – Court applauds this conduct

Dr. Dilip Amonkar v/s Michael Rodrigues & Ors.
16MLCD (j385) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Merely writing “Discharged on request” on discharge card without taking any written undertaking (negative consent) of patient / attendants – An act of “omission of the hospital administration” holds court

Dr. Naorem Sharatkumar Singh & Anr. v/s R. K. Nolini Devi
16MLCD (j392) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Patient

Court accepts having a cardiac OT next to every cath lab is not possible while holding the cardiologist not negligent in a case of coronary perforation during angioplasty

Kakasaheb v/s Dr. Satish Roplekar
16MLCD (j396) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Court says "consider the circumstances, the place and availability of the specialist or consultant in that area during the prevailing time" – A surgeon held not negligent for performing hysterectomy

Purushottam Pareek & Anr. v/s Dr. Govind S. Dhavale & Ors.
16MLCD (j401) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Transferring patient in good faith with a “small window of time period available (around one hour)” – Choosing a lesser evil from the options available is not negligence, observes court

Pandharinath Waghole v/s Sanjeevani Hospital & Ors.
16MLCD (j408) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

“The act of doctor … is not like maths where one plus one makes two all the times,” similarly need for a second surgery does not mean earlier one has failed, observes court

Global Longlife Hospital & Research Limited v/s Arunaben Y Trivedi
16MLCD (j410) | Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad
Judgement in favour of: Doctor



How To Get Maximum
    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
×