Summary
The surgeon’s decision to operate despite critically low platelets was negligent on this record because no evidence established the surgery as an immediately necessary life-saving option. The National Commission erred in treating the conduct as slight negligence and reducing the compensation. The full ₹6 lakh compensation was made payable by the hospital on vicarious-liability principles; no evidentiary basis for a further enhancement was established.
Issues
- Whether the decision to operate was reasonable in the patient’s proved condition.
- Whether compensation should be restored or enhanced and who should pay it.
Held
- Medical treatment may involve genuine professional differences and necessary risks. Here, however, the claimed urgent necessity for roundworm-removal surgery despite low platelets was not supported by evidence, making the decision unreasonable in the particular circumstances. (¶ 12–14)
- Compensation required an evidentiary and legally acceptable basis. The record lacked the family-income material necessary for the requested further enhancement. (¶ 15–17)
- The National Commission should not have reduced the ₹6 lakh compensation by absolving the surgeon. The hospital’s vicarious liability permitted the entire amount to be apportioned to it. (¶ 18–19)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. Entire ₹6 lakh compensation payable by the hospital. Additional ₹2 lakh restored over the amount already paid, with 6% annual interest from the State Commission’s order dated 12 November 2014.