Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.44 seconds)
Employees State Insurance Corp. ... vs Moninder Singh on 31 August, 2012 cites

Martin F. D' Souza vs Mohd. Ishfaq on 17 February, 2009

17. After going through the documents and material placed on file and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned District Forum observed that the second bottle of blood was not stored in proper and hygienic storage conditions and consequently it got contaminated from 14.09.2004 to 21.09.2004 on account of mistake or negligence committed by employees of appellant no.1-hospital and they instead of providing matching blood bottle, provided different blood group bottle which on transfusion immediately reacted and the blood was not accepted by the body of patient, leading to unfortunate death of the patient. There is no material on record to First Appeal No.1422 of 2009 8 contribute such negligence either to respondent no.5-CMC Hospital or respondent no.6-Blood Bank. Though no expert was examined on the quantum of negligence pertaining to transfusion of second blood bottle, but applying the principle of res-ipsa-loquitor, there is no escape from concluding that second transfused blood bottle reacted, either it was contaminated or negligently wrong blood group mismatching with the blood the patient was transfused. Relying upon "Dr. V.Vidhyaullatha Vs R. Bhagawathy", 1 (2006) CPJ-136(NC); "Martin F. D'Souza Vs Mohd. Ishfaq", 1 (2009)CPJ- 32(Supreme Court) and "State of Punjab Vs Shiv Ram & Ors.", 2005 (3) Apex Criminal-268(Supreme Court), the complaint was allowed against the appellants, directing the appellants to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation costs to respondents no.1 to 4. Complaint against respondents no.5 to 7 was dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 502 - M Katju - Full Document

Dr. K. Vidhyullatha vs R. Bhagawathy on 25 January, 2005

17. After going through the documents and material placed on file and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned District Forum observed that the second bottle of blood was not stored in proper and hygienic storage conditions and consequently it got contaminated from 14.09.2004 to 21.09.2004 on account of mistake or negligence committed by employees of appellant no.1-hospital and they instead of providing matching blood bottle, provided different blood group bottle which on transfusion immediately reacted and the blood was not accepted by the body of patient, leading to unfortunate death of the patient. There is no material on record to First Appeal No.1422 of 2009 8 contribute such negligence either to respondent no.5-CMC Hospital or respondent no.6-Blood Bank. Though no expert was examined on the quantum of negligence pertaining to transfusion of second blood bottle, but applying the principle of res-ipsa-loquitor, there is no escape from concluding that second transfused blood bottle reacted, either it was contaminated or negligently wrong blood group mismatching with the blood the patient was transfused. Relying upon "Dr. V.Vidhyaullatha Vs R. Bhagawathy", 1 (2006) CPJ-136(NC); "Martin F. D'Souza Vs Mohd. Ishfaq", 1 (2009)CPJ- 32(Supreme Court) and "State of Punjab Vs Shiv Ram & Ors.", 2005 (3) Apex Criminal-268(Supreme Court), the complaint was allowed against the appellants, directing the appellants to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation costs to respondents no.1 to 4. Complaint against respondents no.5 to 7 was dismissed.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1