Current Issue

December 2022

Supreme Court questions the rationale behind shifting the patient to a distant hospital if appropriate facilities were available locally

Harnek Singh & Ors. v/s Gurmit Singh & Ors.
15MLCD (j467) | Supreme Court of India
Judgement in favour of: Patient

“The old method was still in use and there is nothing … to prove such method was legally abandoned / stopped” – A reasonable standard of practice and not negligence holds National Commission

Manjulata Garg v/s Dr. R. C. Mishra & Ors.
15MLCD (j471) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

A homeopathic doctor administering allopathic medicine during emergencies acts as a “Good Samaritan” and is not negligent, holds National Consumer Commission (majority view)

Chandra Prakash Prasad v/s Dr. Sarbajit Singh & Anr.
15MLCD (j475) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Patient

Wrong FNAC report is not always negligence and "should always be interpreted in the context of the triple test,” observes National Consumer Commission

Sajidah Shaukath v/s Messrs Anand Diagnostic Laboratory & Ors.
15MLCD (j479) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

"Radiological investigations are indirect evidence, whereas the clinical assessment and arthroscopy are directly helpful to arrive proper diagnosis" – National Consumer Commission

Dr. Harpreet Singh & Anr. v/s Harkanwar Singh & Anr.
15MLCD (j483) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Father was busy compromising with the vehicle owner and delayed transfer of the injured son but the doctor who provided emergency care faces court for 19 years – Long live justice!

Gurmeet Kaur v/s Dr. Tej Pal Singh Sandhu & Anr.
15MLCD (j487) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Court finds that the doctor deposing as an expert witness was to get half of the compensation awarded – Is merely referring to him as a “highly interested witness" enough?

E. Syamala & Ors. v/s Dr. Alexander Abraham & Ors.
15MLCD (j491) | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Judgement in favour of: Doctor

Know Your MLCD

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

The medical law reporters for Indian doctors

Current Issue

December 2022

Supreme Court questions the rationale behind shifting the patient to a distant hospital if appropriate facilities were available locally

“The old method was still in use and there is nothing … to prove such method was legally abandoned / stopped” – A reasonable standard of practice and not negligence holds National Commission

A homeopathic doctor administering allopathic medicine during emergencies acts as a “Good Samaritan” and is not negligent, holds National Consumer Commission (majority view)

Wrong FNAC report is not always negligence and "should always be interpreted in the context of the triple test,” observes National Consumer Commission

"Radiological investigations are indirect evidence, whereas the clinical assessment and arthroscopy are directly helpful to arrive proper diagnosis" – National Consumer Commission

Father was busy compromising with the vehicle owner and delayed transfer of the injured son but the doctor who provided emergency care faces court for 19 years – Long live justice!

Court finds that the doctor deposing as an expert witness was to get half of the compensation awarded – Is merely referring to him as a “highly interested witness" enough?

From the Editors Desk

Current Issue

December 2022

Supreme Court questions the rationale behind shifting the patient to a distant hospital if appropriate facilities were available locally

“The old method was still in use and there is nothing … to prove such method was legally abandoned / stopped” – A reasonable standard of practice and not negligence holds National Commission

A homeopathic doctor administering allopathic medicine during emergencies acts as a “Good Samaritan” and is not negligent, holds National Consumer Commission (majority view)

Wrong FNAC report is not always negligence and "should always be interpreted in the context of the triple test,” observes National Consumer Commission

"Radiological investigations are indirect evidence, whereas the clinical assessment and arthroscopy are directly helpful to arrive proper diagnosis" – National Consumer Commission

Father was busy compromising with the vehicle owner and delayed transfer of the injured son but the doctor who provided emergency care faces court for 19 years – Long live justice!

Court finds that the doctor deposing as an expert witness was to get half of the compensation awarded – Is merely referring to him as a “highly interested witness" enough?

From the Editors Desk

Key Features