In the matter of Dhanvantri Hospital & Research Centre and anr. vs Santosh Kumar Sharma & others, the bench of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission headed Dr S.M. Kantikar allows an appeal filed by the Hospital, alleging that there was no negligence on the doctor’s part while performing the flap surgery on the patient. The complainant suffered from extreme burn injuries on the upper body. 

The consumer Commission noted that the doctor failed to perform their duty and he cannot be blamed for all the injuries which the patient suffered, it was not in his domain to perform the surgery as he was not a plastic surgeon.

Case Brief

Back in the year 2011, Santosh Kumar, the complainant suffered electric burn injuries in his arms, legs and abdomen due to electric shock and two days after the incident, the complainant was admitted to the appellant hospital, Dhanvantri Hospital & Research Centre. Two operations were performed on his left hand.

The complainant was admitted to the hospital on 05.07.2011 and his operation was done on 09.07.2011 and 11.07.2011, the patient alleged that the delay in performing the operation and the subsequent operation led to ‘gangrene’ of the left arm which was later amputated in another hospital.

The patient submitted that he suffered from infection and gangrene because of the doctor’s negligence while operating at the hospital, This resulted in the patient becoming completely handicapped and suffering from 80% disability. The complainant filed a consumer complaint against the doctor.

Jaipur State Commission decided in favour of the patient since it appeared that all the complications started only after getting admitted to Dhanvantri Hospital, after the operation and the bleeding.

On the other hand, the appellant denied all the allegations submitted that the patient himself absconded from S.M.S. Jaipur (hospital of first instance) and then approached them in a very serious condition.

Further, they submitted that a “CT Angiography” was performed just a day after the patient approached the appellant hospital and then the flap surgery was performed on 09.07.2011 to prevent further damage and infection.

All the allegations of medical negligence were explicitly denied by the appellants.

 NDRC relied on several articles on the subject to determine that it was actually the severity of burns which led to the damage of muscles, nerved and blood vessels of the patient’s arm and that the Flap Surgery was an acceptable procedure performed with reasonable care by the doctor.

Relying on the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s case of Dr Laxman Balakrishna Joshi vs Dr Trimbak Bapu Godbole & Anr., the commission reiterated the following 3 duties that the doctor owes to his patient:

• • (a) a duty of care in deciding whether to undertake the case;
  • (b) a duty of care in deciding what treatment to give; and
  • (c) a duty of care in the administration of that treatment.”

The commission further said that Doctors failed to perform their duties and thus paved way for negligence. The doctor was not held liable for all the injuries sustained by the patient, but liable to the limited extent of performing the Flap Surgery.

With the aforementioned observations, a compensation of 20 Lakh Rupees was awarded to the patient which was to be given by the appellants within 6 days and hence the appeal was partly allowed.