Medico-Legal

“The Court should not presume that the allegations in the complaint are inviolable truth” “The complainant failed to prove that instead of giving injection intravenously it was given intramuscular which caused damaged to her”. (Adv. ROHiT ERANDE) © Case Details : IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION. FIRST APPEAL NO. 359/2017 – DOD – 05/07/2022 DR. R. SINGH (MEDICAL DIRECTOR) MAVI HOSPITAL PVT. 2. DR. DEEPALI BISHT M.D. (GYNAECOLOGIST), DELHI (Ori. Opponents)  V/s.  SMT. SHABANA (Ori. Complainant)  CORAM: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT) HON’BLE SH. RAJAN SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Judgment Link : http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetPdf.do?method=getPdf&cid=8%2F0%2FA%2F359%2F2017&dtOfHearing=2022-07-05 Brief Facts : 1. As per complaint complainant went to OP1 hospital where she got treated by OP2. As per advice of OP 2 after regular checkups and medicines she was admitted in OP1 hospital on 20.02.2012. On 21.2.2012 at about 12:00 hours she

Dismissed : The Case with the allegations that Hysterectomy was performed for making profit and without telling alternative methods of treatment.  " VVF is a known complication of TAH with  BSO   in the background of post LUCS Adhesion"  Adv. ROHiT ERANDE. ©   Case Details : REVISION PETITION NO. 331 OF 2021  (Against the Order dated 31/12/2019 in Appeal No. 927/2016 of the State Commission West Bengal)  DINABANDHU ALUNI & ANR. V/s.  DR. ALOKE KUMAR BHUSHAN & 2 ORS. BEFORE:     HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR,PRESIDING MEMBER Judgment Link : Dated : 30 Sep 2022 http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FRP%2F331%2F2021&dtofhearing=2022-09-30 Facts in short : 1.      The case of the Complainant is that her wife, Smt. Jharna ( the ‘patient’) was operated at SNR Carnival Hospital on 17.01.2013 and suffered post-hysterectomy Vasico Vaginal Fistula (VVF). Therefore, the patient further got operated at CMC, Vellore and in

A Case claiming Rs.1/- compensation  dismissed.   Technical lapses or improper documentation, cannot be attributed  to Medical Negligence.  Adv. ROHiT ERANDE  © Dr. SIDDHARTHA S. MOOKERJEE & anr.,   V/s. MADHAB CHAND MITTER & M/S. APOLLO GLENEAGLES HOSPITAL LTD.,  KOLKATA.   R EVISION PETITION NO. 645 OF 2020   (Against the Order dated 13/02/2020 in Appeal No. 1313/2017 of the State Commission West Bengal) BEFORE  NCDRC:  HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR ,PRESIDING MEMBER & HON’BLE Mr. BINOY KUMAR, MEMBER   Judgment Link : http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FRP%2F645%2F2020&dtofhearing=2022-08-26 Brief Facts : 1.          The Complainant’s wife   Mrs. Susmita Mitter ( ‘patient’) was under chemotherapy treatment of metastatic ovarian cancer.  She was critical, in terminal stage and on ventilator support.  It was alleged that on 30/07/2014 night due to negligence and some technical lapses from the doctors in ICU

  Unexpected ‘Two fold ‘Supreme relief’ to Doctors under #POCSO Act related to disclosing identity of the child.. (But then problem would be, what to be reported and how ?) Adv. ROHiT ERNADE.  © In a landmark judgment, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of a section of the amended Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (MTP) that gave only certain categories of women the right to terminate pregnancies between 20 weeks and 24 weeks, enlarging the right of women to have abortions. The court held that the law cannot discriminate between married and unmarried women. Case Details :  X V/s. The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. Civil Appeal No 5802 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) No 12612 of 2022). judgment Link : https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2022/21815/21815_2022_2_1501_38628_Judgement_29-Sep-2022.pdf      Lets’ see what their Lordships held about POCSO Act, but before that lets see in nutshe