Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (2.75 seconds)
Also At 107 vs The Union Of India on 28 August, 2017 cites

1. Care Hospital M/S Quality Care India ... vs 1. Vemuganti Venu Gopal Rao And Others on 22 September, 2014

In both the rulings, Master Akash vs. Ministry of Health & Family Government of India & Ors. (supra) and Care Hospital M/s. Quality Care India Ltd. vs. Vemuganti Venugopal Rao & Anr. (supra), the respective Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission have observed that before transfusion of the blood to a patient, screening for HIV should be made and if it is done then there is no medical negligence. The defendants have filed the copies of donors blood grouping register Ex. DW2/30 to Ex. DW2/34 and copies of donors blood report register Ex. DW2/35 to Ex. DW2/39 for the relevant period and it shows that the HIV status of the donors was negative. Mark 'A' i.e the details of the blood transfusion given to the plaintiff also shows that the status of the blood transmitted to the plaintiff was negative. Therefore, it is established that the doctors at defendant No.2 hospital had carried out the screening for HIV of the blood transmitted to the plaintiff.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Master Akash vs Ministry Of Health & Family Welfare on 11 September, 2012

In both the rulings, Master Akash vs. Ministry of Health & Family Government of India & Ors. (supra) and Care Hospital M/s. Quality Care India Ltd. vs. Vemuganti Venugopal Rao & Anr. (supra), the respective Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission have observed that before transfusion of the blood to a patient, screening for HIV should be made and if it is done then there is no medical negligence. The defendants have filed the copies of donors blood grouping register Ex. DW2/30 to Ex. DW2/34 and copies of donors blood report register Ex. DW2/35 to Ex. DW2/39 for the relevant period and it shows that the HIV status of the donors was negative. Mark 'A' i.e the details of the blood transfusion given to the plaintiff also shows that the status of the blood transmitted to the plaintiff was negative. Therefore, it is established that the doctors at defendant No.2 hospital had carried out the screening for HIV of the blood transmitted to the plaintiff.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 6 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1