#LegallySpeaking: Postrio Paresis After Urology Surgery
Now open: Certificate Course in Management of Covid-19 by Govt. Of Gujarat and PlexusMDKnow more...Now open: Certificate Course in Management of Covid-19 by Govt. Of Gujarat and PlexusMDKnow more...
• Background of the case:

~ The High Court observed in a case where a doctor and a hospital approached the court opposing a subcourt's decision of applying the principle of 'res ipsa loquitor' means "the thing speaks for itself" in a case of medical negligence where patient suffered postrio paresis and became crippled for life.

• Complainant/Patient's allegation:

~ The 29-year-old patient was advised to undergo keyhole surgery to remove the calculi and within 30 minutes of commencement of the surgery, it was halted and he was brought out with oxygen support and catheter inserted. Post-operation, he noticed that he was unable to move.

~ He was referred to Hospital 2, where, spinal subdural clots were detected which caused permanent damage to his lower limbs.

~ Patient alleged that illness and disability occurred due to the injury sustained on the spinal cord during the keyhole surgery performed by a doctor in the most callous, negligent, and irresponsible manner and claimed compensation.

• Doctor's Defense:

~ The doctor and the hospital denied the allegations and pointed out that the averments were all cooked up, solely for gaining an undue financial advantage.

~ They submitted that the patient was diagnosed with multiple secondary calculi with right hydronephrosis with obstruction at the pelvic-ureteric junction. The patient developed cardiac problems and the procedure had to be abandoned.

~ The problems arose either because of a pre-existing aneurysm rupture or because of the cardiac arrest said doctor and hospital.

• High Court Held that:

~ The High Court upheld the judgment of the subcourt and dismissed the plea made by a consultant urologist and the hospital.

~ The court applied the maxim of 'res ipsa loquitor' on the case and awarded a compensation of Rs.20,40,000 to the petitioner.

• Tip:

~ The principle of res ipsa loquitor is applicable, if the patient suffers a complication not contemplated normally. In such a case, the patient is not required to prove anything more than the complication as having occurred. The res proves itself.

Source:
https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-386432.pdf
Dr. T●●●●z H●●●●●●i and 10 others like this5 shares
Like
Comment
Share
Dr. V●●●●●●j D●●●i
Dr. V●●●●●●j D●●●i Legal Medicine
I believe that there is some error, may be typographical, in reporting this news. It is written herein that both national commission and high court had roles in the decision. This is impossible to believe. Appeals from national consumer disputes redressal commission and High court, both go to the h' ble Supreme Court. Where is the question of any of the two respected bodies sitting in appeal towards the other' s (high court or national commission) orders?... Read more
Dec 30, 2020Like