Mere Error In Judgment Of Diagnosis Of Ailment Is Not Medical Negligence: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court observed that mere error in judgment in the diagnosis of an ailment cannot be said to be medical negligence.
The Court dismissed the suit for compensation filed by the parents of a deceased child against a paediatrician (doctor) for the alleged medical negligence that led to their child's death.
A Single Bench of Justice Devan M. Desai observed, “In such set of facts, when the patient had taken treatment from various doctors and from various hospital and in absence of any cogent material in proving medical negligence on the part of the defendant No.1 and mere an error in judgment in diagnosis of ailment cannot be said to be the medical negligence.”
Advocate Vikram J Thakor appeared for the appellant, while Advocate HS Munshaw represented the respondent.
The child was initially diagnosed with tuberculosis (T.B.) by Dr. Mehta in October 1985 but was later found to be suffering from Chronic Renal Failure (CRF) and urinary tract infections, a condition unrelated to T.B.
The parents consulted other doctors as well, who diagnosed the child with renal calculus (kidney stones) instead of T.B.
Following the death of their son, the parents filed both criminal charges and a civil suit against the doctors. The criminal case was dismissed, with the court acquitting the doctor. The civil suit was filed seeking compensation for the alleged medical negligence.
In the suit, the parents alleged that the doctor did not correctly diagnose the child's kidney-related issues and instead treated him for T.B., which was later found to be an incorrect diagnosis.
The High Court explained that in cases of medical negligence, what is to be considered is whether the treating doctor had taken due care and had followed the established medical practice in treating the patient.
“Except the aforesaid oral deposition of defendant No.1, the plaintiffs have not been able to extract any adverse fact which attributes the negligence on the part of the defendant No.1 in resulting death of child,” the Court remarked.
The Court stated that in establishing medical negligence, there must be conclusive medical evidence which can establish the fact that the medical practitioner was negligent in discharging their duties and the line of treatment which was adopted in treating the patient was not as per the prescribed adopted medical practise.
Consequently, the Court held, “The learned trial Court has not committed any error in arriving at a conclusion which is based on medical evidence that defendant No.1 has not acted in a negligent manner. Resultantly, the First Appeal fails and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeal.
Cause Title: Dineshkumar Mohanlal Shah & Anr. v. Dr. Bharatkumar J Mehta (Child Specialist.) & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:GUJHC:46524)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Vikram J Thakor and Robin Prasad
Respondent: Advocates HS Munshaw, Devang Bhatt and Kirti S Pathak
