Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has on April 22, 2025 upheld the NCDRC's decision holding a hospital and its doctor liable for deficiency in service for the death of 27-year-old B Tech graduate, saying there is ample evidences as well as records to indicate the same.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih said the findings returned by the APSCDRC and NCDRC in regards to the present case, cannot be invalidated and are therefore affirmed. 

"Considering that the individual was a B Tech graduate and he was working in a soap factory, albeit drawing a modest salary. In the beginning, when youngsters start their career, generally, humble short steps are taken. It is evident that he was financially supporting the family and had the qualification and potentiality for earning higher income in future. Therefore, it cannot be said that the compensation as has been assessed by NCDRC is without any basis or the quantum is on extremely higher side," the bench said.

The bench noted that the NCDRC has fixed the compensation at Rs 5 lakhs to be paid by Dr J V S Vidyasagar, who has accepted the said judgment and has even deposited the said amount.

The court held that the decision of the NCDRC is upheld however, the amount of compensation with regards to the liability of the appellant hospital would stand at Rs 10 lakhs along with accrued interest. The amount so deposited would be disbursed to Respondent no 1, the complainant Peddi Narayana Swami on an application to the concerned Registrar of the Top Court.

"We have been informed that the said amount has increased with the auto renewal facility over a period of time. We are thus of the considered view that the amount of Rs 10 lakhs as stands deposited in this Court by the appellant along with the accrued interest thereon would serve the interest of justice and the said amount of compensation would suffice as far as the liability of the appellant hospital is concerned," the bench added.

Brief Background

The Managing Director, Kamineni Hospitals challenged the validity of the National Consumers Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi order of August 26, 2022 along with the order of March 08, 2011 of the Andhra Pradesh State Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, which held the Hospital as vicariously liable for medical negligence and foisted it with a liability of Rs 15 lakhs with further compensation of Rs 5 lakhs upon the doctor of the hospital totalling Rs 20 lakhs.

The challenge was on the ground that the liability has been imposed upon the appellant and Dr Vidyasagar on the ground of negligence without there being any medical literature or evidence of any expert substantiating the said findings. The appellant claimed that it followed the due standard of care expected of a medical professional and once a reasonable competent practitioner had taken caution and due care was observed, the guilt of medical negligence cannot be said to be made out against the doctor as well as the hospital.        

There has neither been any negligence nor incompetence at the end of the doctors or staff of the appellant-hospital. Proper timing and medical standards have been duly adhered to in accordance with norms and standard practices recognized and followed in similar circumstances for which there can be no responsibility holding the appellant hospital liable and therefore the liability qua the compensation as has been imposed is unsustainable, the appellants counsel said.

Case Title: Managing Director, Kamineni Hospitals v. Peddi Narayana Swami & Anr.