Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.25 seconds)
Documents citing State Of M.P. vs Smt. Sundari Bai And Anr. on 23 January, 2003

Smt.Fatima Bi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 30 July, 2013

The impugned notice dated 31.5.2007 (annexure P/26) and the order dated 05.01.2006 (Annexure P/22) passed by Collector, Shahdol in Case No. 10/revision/04-05 (State of M.P. Vs. Smt. Fatima Bi and another) directing to delete the name of deceased Mohd. Haneef and thereafter the name of deceased petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 in the revenue record and further directing to endorse the name of State of M.P. in the revenue record stands quashed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 6 - A K Shrivastava - Full Document

Smt. Om Bai Choudhary vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 June, 2023

The Coordinate Bench of this Court in Smt. Sundari Bai (supra) also referred to William's Obstetrics 21st Edition Pages 1556 to 1560 which deal Signature Not Verified with "sterilisation". It is stated at page 1559 of 1997 Edition : "No method of SAN Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA tubal sterilisation is without failure". "Soderstrom (1985) concluded that most SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2023.06.15 19:18:01 IST sterilisation failures were not preventable. A similar conclusion was reached by 3 the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1996), which stated, "pregnancies after sterilisation may occur without any technical errors". Finally, the lifetime increased cumulative failure rates overtime are supportive that failure after one year are not likely due to technical errors".
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Arigela Lakshman East Godavari vs Dr.J.V.V.N.Prasad Wast Godavari on 24 April, 2008

21. The learned counsel for the respondent also relied on a decision reported in AIR 2003 MP 284 (State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Smt. Sundari Bai) wherein the doctor has conducted operation in a different way. It was held that the doctor cannot be held negligent and fasten with liability to pay damages on the ground that the doctor should have adopted a different treatment or operated in different way. P.W.1 himself admitted that open surgery could be done when it was not possible for conducting laparoscopic surgery.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1