Latest Supreme Court Judgment on Medical Negligence: Case Comment (Part II)

In the last post, I discussed about the facts and issues raised in this case. Here are my views regarding it.

It is true that Dr.Saha had been fighting for justice for the past 15 years. It is great to see such an inspiring judgment from the court in times when medical negligence has become such a menace to our society. However, to be honest, I do not see any reason to be euphoric about this judgment. The court has granted Rs.6 crore compensation to a person who has long fought for justice. But, what we really need to understand is that whether this verdict has given us something new? In India, we have a pretty well-settled medical jurisprudence. There have been hundreds of judgments explaining various facets of medical malpractice in our country. What is so new and novel about this particular judgment? I will try to explain this in my own manner.

1. The court said that inflation must also be taken into account while considering enhancement of compensation. There is nothing new about it. There have been plethora of judgments which say that inflation is an important component in this regard.

2. The court said that mere technical and procedural errors should not come in the way of doing complete justice. There is nothing novel about it. This has also been said in the earlier judgments.

3. Rate of interest was also taken into account. Again, there is nothing new about it.

4. However, the court absolved Mr.Saha of all the liabilities. It clarified that he had no role in contributing towards the negligence of the doctors. This is a very welcome step as in a lot of cases, the near and dear ones try to put forth their opinion in front of the doctor. However, it is quite clear now that the ultimate responsibility rests with the doctor and such opinion of the near and dear ones cannot diminish the liability of the doctor in any manner.

5. An interesting fact to note is that in the present case, the claimant tried to show how he has suffered non-pecuniary special damages. The court took this point into regard. The claimant claimed an extraordinary amount of Rs.31 Crore as non-pecuniary special damages. This is a trend alien to our country. Such humongous amount of compensation is mostly granted in countries like U.K. and U.S.A. I am glad that our apex court did not fall into this trap. It clearly said that such compensation is excessive and it is not inclined to grant the same.

6. The court, in its concluding remarks, discussed that right to health is also a part of article 21. This part of the verdict has been highlighted by the media as well. However, I really do not think that article 21 or right to health was involved in the present case. This case had very limited issues. The court restricted itself to the validity of compensation granted by the National Commission and the role of Mr.Saha in contributing towards the negligence of the doctors and the hospital. Other related issues were also discussed. But, it would be clearly wrong to say that this case involved article 21 or right to health. This case was merely an appeal against the order of the National Commission. The remarks regarding right to health were merely passing remarks or obiter.

7. Also, it is very wrong to highlight just the amount of compensation granted by the court in this case. This is the first time that court has granted such a huge amount of compensation. But, before knowing this, we must also understand that the victim in the present case was a foreign resident and a well-qualified person. The court while granting the compensation considered her future earnings, standard of living, education qualification etc. After that only, the court came to conclude that the National Commission did not grant adequate compensation in the present case.

8. In case of an Indian resident and a person with average educational qualification, I do not think that the court will grant such huge amount of compensation. It is well-settled in law that the education qualifications, future earnings, standard of living and other such factors are the prime factors to be considered while computing the compensation.

9. The Court very rightly said that it is not inclined to use a straight-jacket multiplier method in this case. The court distinguished medical negligence cases from Motor Accident cases. Also, if we follow the methodology adopted by the court in the present case and apply it to a similar victim who is an ordinary housewife residing in India, I do not think that court would grant such a huge compensation to his husband. This point is very important to understand since the court has said that there is no straight-jacket formula in such cases. Each case must be decided differently.

I really think it is quite unnecessary to form a negative image in our mind for doctors and private hospitals. The incident that happened in the present was an unfortunate one. But, it would be very wrong to blame the whole doctor community for it. Doctors are doing a fine service to our nation. It is very easy to blame. But, if you look at the ground realities and the availability of resources, you will understand how efficient and competent our doctors are. The government is also working hard towards this fact. For e.g. in Madhya Pradesh, the government has started a 24/7 medical service van. A person just has to dial 108 and tell his problem. The medical van will come to his doorstep and take him to the nearest hospital. All the medical expenses in this regard shall be borne by the government. No matter where you are and no matter at what time you have called, the 108 medical van will come for you as soon as possible. And even in the middle of the night, the doctors will treat you for even the slightest of ailments such as headache or common cold. Thus, while looking at these cases, we must consider the position of doctors as well.

To read more about medical negligence, you can visit here.