Summary
A dengue patient admitted to intensive care died after her blood parameters were not monitored through a critical period of treatment. The Supreme Court restored the finding of negligence against the hospital, excluded personal liability of its Director, and enhanced compensation to Rs.15 lakhs with 9% interest. It emphasised reasonable professional care, timely monitoring and the economic value of a homemaker’s contribution.
Issues
- Whether failure to monitor essential blood parameters constituted medical negligence despite an accepted fluid-treatment protocol.
- How professional opinion bears on the standard of reasonable medical care.
- Whether the Director was personally liable and compensation required enhancement.
Held
- The defect was not the choice of intravenous fluids but failure to monitor blood parameters in time, contrary to the relevant WHO and national guidelines. Timely monitoring would have alerted the hospital to progressive deterioration. Conjecture that the family would resist testing could not excuse tests never undertaken. (¶¶ 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 44)
- Medical professionals owe the care of a reasonably competent practitioner, assessed against knowledge and equipment available at the time. Genuine differences in treatment are permitted, but professional opinion does not immunise proven unreasonable conduct; the Court remained bound by the general and approved practice standard in Jacob Mathew. (¶¶ 29, 41, 42, 43)
- The NCDRC displaced reasoned factual findings without cogent reasons. The patient’s aspirin use had been disclosed on admission and did not justify reversal of the negligence finding. (¶¶ 45, 46, 47)
- The hospital remained liable, but its Director was not personally liable because he was neither the treating nor referring doctor. (¶ 48)
- A homemaker’s family contribution has economic value. The children’s employment and non-joinder did not justify restricting compensation. The hospital must pay Rs.15 lakhs with 9% annual interest from institution of the complaint until payment or realisation, within two months. (¶¶ 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56)
Result
Appeals allowed in the stated terms. Hospital to pay Rs.15 lakhs with 9% annual interest from complaint institution, within two months; Director not personally liable. No costs.