Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)

Charan Singh vs Healing Touch Hospital & Ors on 20 September, 2000

The contention of the opposite party that anesthetist was asked to come only as a precautionary measure and that there was no urgency is unsustainable on the ground that the patient needs to be intubated by an Anaesthetist when the ABG level showed acute respiratory failure, hence to contend that the presence of Anaesthetist was not urgent cannot be sustained. The learned counsel for the opposite party further contended that there was no expert opinion and relied on the judgements of the National Commission in CHARAN SINGH v. HEALING TOUCH HOSITALS AND OTHERS in III (2003) CPJ 62 NC, DR.JARKANWALJIT SINGH SAINI v. GURBAX SINGH AND ANOTHER in I (2003) CPJ 153 (NC), RANI DEVI v. DR.S.R.AGARWAL AND OTHERS in III (2002) CPJ 136 (NC) wherein it was held that in the absence of expert evidence, no relief can be granted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 220 - Full Document

Sushma Sharma & Ors. vs Bombay Hospital & Ors. on 28 February, 2007

We rely on the judgement of the National Commission in SUSHMA SHARMA v. BOMBAY HOSPITAL in II (2007) CPJ 9 (NC) wherein it was held that One cannot expect the patient and his relatives to play this coordinating role and to find out as to which doctor has prescribed what treatment and whether the Specialists instructions are being implemented properly and within reasonable time by the resident doctors. It is also clearly not possible for the individual subject Specialist to coordinate the overall management of the patient and such responsibility has to rest on the doctor in charge of the parent unit. It is necessary that all super speciality hospitals lay down a clear protocol for coordination and management of a patient suffering from multiple medical problems requiring consultation with various specialists and to see that there instructions are properly implemented.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 0 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1