Medico-Legal

Case Details : MS. PRASANNA LAKSHMI V/s. MAXIVISION LASER CENTER PVT. LTD., Hyderabad Decided on 05/04/2019 by Hon. National Commission Before :  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL,PRESIDENT and  Mrs. M. Shreesha, Member Judgment Link : http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FFA%2F196%2F2013&dtofhearing=2019-04-05 Facts in brief : Both the parties have approached to national commission against the Judgment and Order passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Commission, Complainant  for enhancement of compensation and Hospital for dismissal of Complaint. 1.The Complainant - Petitioner-in-person was suffering from short sight problems and hence was approached to the Respondent Hospital. It is to be noted that complainant and her family members used to go same hospital whenever they had eye problems.  2. It is averred that one Dr. Ravi Shanker of the Lasik Centre suggested Lasik Surgery for the Complainant to

Case Details : XYZ V/s. State of Maharashtra (W.P. No.10835/2018) along with other petitions Decided by Division Bench of Hon. Bombay High Court, 03/04/2019 CORAM : Hon. Abhay S. Oka & Hon. M.S. Sonak, JJ. Facts of the case in short (the judgment runs in to 78 pages): 1. Various petitions were clubbed together to decide following moot questions : a) Whether pregnancy can be terminated exceeding 20 weeks, i.e. the ceiling limit prescribed by Sec. 3(2) of MTP Act  and whether high Court has right to pass such order ? b) If permission is so granted, then what should be the procedure and what safeguards to be taken ? c) What is the legal status of the child born alive despite attempts   at   medical   termination   of   pregnancy   ­   the procedure   to   be   followed   in   such   cases   –   and   the responsibility of the State in such matters? 2. Hon. bombay high Court has dealt with all the issues in detail and has considered various cases, aspects of