If the treatment given by Doctor is found to be proper, the Expert opinion has no significance: NCDRC

"If the treatment given by Doctor is found to be proper, them Expert opinion has no significance.."

It's a great relief for Doctors by National Commission in its recent judgment dated 20/09/2016, in the case of DR. SHRIKANT V. MUKEWAR V/s. VIMAL & 2 ORS.

Lets see the facts in nutshell :
1. The original Complainant ( patient) was the known case of COPD i.e. chronic obstruction pulmonary disease, i.e. difficulty in breathing and there was obstruction to the air flow.

2.It was alleged that the treating doctor was just sitting in his chamber and did not pay any attention to Patient. As the condition of the patient deteriorated, he was advised to shift to another hospital for want of life supporting system.

3. Thereafter the patient was shifted to another hospital and in all these events, patient had to incur huge expenses and hence case for damages of Rs.2 lakhs was filed.

4. The District Commission dismissed the Complaint, but the State Commission at Nagpur allowed the complaint to the tune of Rs.1 lakh + Rs.10,000/- towards mental pain and agony. Hence the Dr. preferred appeal to National Commission.

Held :

1. On perusal of medical record, it clearly went to show that the patient was treated with proper antibiotics along with proper blood investigations and ultrasound abdomen. The patient was also examined by different doctors.The pleural tapping was also done. The patient was also given blood transfusion without any complications

2. Dr Vijay M. Gedam, Civil Surgeon at Nagpur, however, who was an expert gave an opinion that the Treatment given by Appellant to the patient was not proper.

3.The treatment given was with proper antibiotics and medicines. The patient was under close monitoring by the different doctors in the OP 1/hospital. Therefore, expert opinion of Civil Surgeon has no significance.

4. The court relied on the celebrated judgment of Hon. Apex Court in the Case of Achutrao Hari Bhavu Khodwa Vs. State of Maharashtra 1996 (2) SCC 634 wherein it has been held as :

“The skill of medical practitioners differs from Doctor to Doctor. The very nature of the profession is such that there may be more than one course of treatment which may be advisable for treating a patient. Courts would indeed be slow in attributing Negligence on the part of a doctor if he has performed his duties to the best of his ability and with due care and caution. Medical opinion may differ with regard to the course of action to be taken by a Doctor treating a patient, but as long as a Doctor acts in a manner which is acceptable to the Medical Profession, that has attended on the patient with due care, skill and diligence and if the patient still does not survive or suffers a permanent ailment, it would be difficult to hold the Doctor to be guilty of Negligence.”

Great relief to Doctors. Sincerity and honesty pays...

Thanks and Regds.

Adv. Rohit Erande

Pune

You can read the full judgement by clicking on the following link

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/115575728/