When a Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy becomes a Case of Medical Negligence? Supreme Court of India

Authors

  • Mukesh Yadav Professor and Principal,Department of Forensic Medicine, Rani Durgawati Medical College, Banda, Uttar Pradesh, India
  • Mukesh Kumar Bansal Assistant Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine, Rani Durgawati Medical College, Banda, Uttar Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/

Keywords:

Surgeon, Ethics Committee, Medical record, Deficiency of service

Abstract

It is now well-established that laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a two to three times higher risk of bile duct injury (BDI) in comparison to open cholecystectomy. Moreover, BDI during cholecystectomy is a common cause of litigation of medical negligence against the surgeon. The complainant brought a medical negligence action against the surgeon Dr. Gurmit Singh (OP-1) and the OP-3. On 13.07.2004 the complainant’s wife approached R-1, a laparoscopic surgeon at Preet Surgical Centre & Maternity Hospital, R-2 for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Due to a serious condition, the patient was shifted to DMC Ludhiana where she was treated under R-3. The complainant discussed the cause of death and the need for autopsy with R-3, however, he was told that the patient died due to intraoperative injuries to the colon and bile duct resulting in Peritonitis, Peritoneal Collection, Septicaemia and Multi-Organ failure. It is in the above-referred circumstances that the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the SCDRC, Punjab on 14.02.2005 for monetary compensation quantified at Rs. 62,85,160 from the Respondents for negligence and deficiency of services. The SCDRC after considering the evidence and hearing both the parties, allowed the complaint and held R-1 and 2 negligent and exonerated R-3 and 4. R-1 and 2 were directed to pay Rs.1544000 jointly and severally and Rs.10000 as costs. According to NCDRC, there was no negligence on the part of respondents. Supreme Court opined that the interest of justice would be subserved if R-1 and 2 are directed to pay to the complainants a total amount of Rs. 2500000 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of SCDRC order as compensation. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Uday Umesh Lalit, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. Harnek Singh & Ors. vs. Gurmit Singh & Ors., Civil Appeal Nos. 4126-4127/2022, Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05.06.2020 in AN No.108/2008 05.06.2020 in AN No.120/2008 passed by the National Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. SC. Date of Judgment: 19.05.2022. SC. Accessedfrom: URL:https://main.sci.gov.in/suprem ecourt/2020/16970/16970_2020_4_1502_35968_Judgement 18-May-2022.pdf

[2] Dr. Gurmeet Singh & Ors. vs. Harnek Singh & Ors., F.A. No.120/2008, Date of Judgment: 06.05.2020.NCDRC Accessedfrom:URL:http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/ GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin= 0%20%2FFA%2F120%2F2008&dtofhearing=2020-06-05

[3] Harnek Singh & Ors. vs. Dr. Gurmeet Singh & Ors., F.A. No.108/2008, Date of Judgment: 06.05.2020.NCDRC. Accessedfrom:URL:http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/ GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0% 2F0%2FFA%2F120%2F2008&dtofhearing=2020-06-05

[4] Harnek Singh & Ors. vs. Dr. Gurmeet Singh & Ors., Order dated 24.01.2008 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh.

[5] Maharaja Agrasen Hospital and Ors. vs. Master Rishabh Sharma and Ors. (2020) 6 SCC 501.

[6] Kusum Sharma & Ors. vs. Batra Hospital and Medical Research Centre & Ors., (2010) 3 SCC 480.

[7] Jacob Mathew vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2005) 6 SCC 1.

[8] Achutrao Haribhau Khodwa and Others vs. State of Maharashtra and others (1996) 2 SCC 634.

[9] S.K. Jhunjhunwala vs. Dhanwanti Kaur & Anr. (2019) 2 SCC 282.

Published

2022-07-30

How to Cite

When a Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy becomes a Case of Medical Negligence? Supreme Court of India . (2022). Indian Internet Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 20(1&2), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.48165/