Supreme Court - Daily Orders
N. Sunitha vs Nizams Institute Of Medical Sciences on 15 March, 2023
Bench: A.S. Bopanna, C.T. Ravikumar
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2441 OF 2011
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2441 OF 2011
N. SUNITHA APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
NIZAMS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES,
HYDERABAD & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the appeal papers.
As against the conclusion reached by the State Commission through order dated 31.08.2004, the respondent No.1 herein was before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (‘the NCDRC’) in FA No.77/2005. The NCDRC having taken note of the contentions has arrived at the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by GEETA AHUJA Date: 2023.03.17 conclusion that mere procurement of the pace maker 11:07:45 IST Reason: by the respondent-hospital cannot amount to 1 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2441 OF 2011 negligence. However, taking note that there were certain defects in the device, has directed, the manufacturer to pay a sum of Rs.2 Lakhs which has already been paid.
Though, the learned counsel for the appellant seeks to contend that the State Commission had arrived at the conclusion that there was negligence on the part of the respondent-hospital in procuring the said device, we note that such observation by the State Commission is not substantiated with any other material to indicate that the same amounted to negligence.
On the other hand, the State Commission itself having referred to the evidence has taken into consideration the manner in which the operation was conducted and has arrived at a specific finding that the second opposite party, i.e. the doctor at the hospital cannot be held negligent since the Doctor had taken all care and precaution in treating the appellant herein. Therefore, in that circumstance, when the NCDRC has taken into consideration all aspects of the matter and has arrived its conclusion, we see no reason to interfere with the well considered order dated 2 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2441 OF 2011 16.09.2009.
In that view, the appeal being devoid of merit, stands dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
.......................J. ( A.S. BOPANNA ) .......................J. ( C.T. RAVIKUMAR ) NEW DELHI 15th MARCH, 2023 3 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2441 OF 2011 ITEM NO.103 COURT NO.12 SECTION XVII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 2441/2011 N. SUNITHA Appellant(s) VERSUS NIZAMS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, HYDERABAD & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 15-03-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR For Appellant(s) Mrs. K.Radha, Adv.
Mr. K.Maruthi Rao, Adv.
Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Byrapaneni Suyodhan, Adv.
Mr. Kumar Shashank, Adv.
Ms. Tatini Basu, AOR Ms. Liz Mathew, AOR Ms. Mallika Agarwal, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following O R D E R The appeal stands dismissed in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(Geeta Ahuja) (Dipti Khurana) Assistant Registrar-cum-PS Assistant Registrar (Signed Order is placed on the file) 4