Father fights against doctor's medical negligence leading to son's death; SC awards Rs 15 lakh compensation, holds hospital responsible
When an individual or their loved ones get admitted to a hospital, they expect the highest level of care, accurate diagnosis, and effective treatment from the doctors. However, sometimes
medical negligence
and non-performance of duty on the part of the doctor can lead to an individual's death.
#Pahalgam Terrorist Attack
India stares at a 'water bomb' threat as it freezes Indus Treaty
India readies short, mid & long-term Indus River plans
Shehbaz Sharif calls India's stand "worn-out narrative"
In such a case, can the aggrieved family hold the doctor liable? Is the hospital also accountable to the deceased's family in such a case? Yes, as per the
Supreme Court
.
In a recent verdict dated April 22, 2025, the Supreme Court upheld NCDRC's (
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
) verdict that a hospital stands vicariously liable for a patient's death, caused by its doctor's medical negligence.
According to the apex court, there was sufficient evidence, like medical records and treatment history, against the hospital and the doctor, pointing to medical negligence. Moreover, the hospital had also failed to disprove the same, despite claiming adherence to standard care procedures.
'Having considered the submission made by the counsel for the parties and upon going through the records of the case, it is apparent that there is ample evidence as well as records to indicate that there was indeed medical negligence on the part of the appellant (Kamineni Hospital, Andhra Pradesh) and respondent no. 2 (Dr. J.V.S. Vidyasagar)', the judgment highlighted.
Live Events
What was the case?
In December 2006, Shivram Prasad's son (aged 27 years) sustained a fracture on his left leg and was taken to Kamineni Hospital, where Dr. JVS Vidyasagar, an orthopaedic surgeon, examined him.
It was alleged that the patient was operated on hurriedly the next day without informed consent, and the doctor did not properly evaluate the patient's existing symptoms before operating.
'At the admission itself, the patient presented with classic signs of fat embolism, but it was left untreated or uncared for. The treating surgeon should have also been vigilant and should have expressed his apprehension/risk to perform ILN (interlocking nail fixation surgery),' the judgment said.
'Postoperatively, the patient was kept on ventilator support. It was further alleged that the doctors and nurses did not attend to him regularly despite his pain and suffering. The treating doctors, after 3 days, informed Prasad about the good recovery of his son. But on December 12, the doctors informed Prasad about the death of his son at 4 p.m. Prasad further alleged that despite requests, the hospital did not issue the entire medical record,' the NCDRC judgment further clarified.
While the doctor was fined Rs 5 lakh, which was already paid, the Supreme Court also set the hospital's fine at Rs 10 lakh, which had already been deposited by Kamineni Hospitals in a fixed deposit with the court.
Vicarious liability—Hospitals cannot go scot free if doctor is negligent
Under vicarious liability, a principal (in this case, the hospital) can be held legally responsible for the acts or omissions of its agents/employees/associates if such acts or omissions occur in the course of their engagement or employment.
Explains Biplab Lenin, Partner, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, 'Hospitals are vicariously liable for acts of medical negligence committed by doctors employed or empanelled by them. When patients choose a hospital, they rely on the institution's overall reputation and expect consistent, competent care. A breach of this duty—whether by omission or commission-—constitutes actionable medical negligence if it deviates from the standard of care expected from an ordinarily prudent medical professional and results in harm to the patient.'
Hence, a hospital's liability arises even if it was not itself directly negligent, as long as it had control over the services rendered. This serves as a means to hold the hospital accountable, since patients often seek treatment based on the hospital's reputation.
'In case of hospitals, the doctors, nurses, technicians and other employees can be held liable for the acts or omissions, in the course of their employment in the hospital,' says Shashank Agarwal, Advocate, Delhi High Court
How can affected families seek compensation?
Medical negligence, which includes actions like misdiagnosis, delayed treatment, surgical errors, administration of incorrect medication, or failure to obtain informed consent by the doctor, is assessed by the court on a case-by-case basis.
Families of patients impacted by medical negligence may seek redressal through multiple avenues, like filing a complaint before the consumer court under the Consumer Protection Act for compensation, initiating a civil suit for damages, or, in certain grave cases, lodging a criminal complaint for causing death by negligence.
'Additionally, complaints can be filed with the State Medical Council or
National Medical Commission
for disciplinary proceedings against the medical professionals involved. Key evidence in such cases includes the patient's complete medical records, prescriptions, diagnostic test reports, operation or treatment notes, and discharge summaries. Medical expert opinions are often crucial in establishing a deviation from accepted medical standards,' says Priya Dhankhar, Counsel, SKV Law Offices
Will insurance be of any help in such cases?
In some cases, insurance can be of help, especially if medical negligence has been established. Generally, hospitals and doctors carry
professional indemnity insurance
, which covers liabilities arising out of such claims. This allows compensation to be paid to victims or their families through the insurer.
Additionally, patients may claim health or life insurance benefits under their individual policies, provided the policy term covers incidents of medical negligence. However, such claims may be subject to scrutiny by insurance companies.
Experts note that while life insurance policies generally cover medical negligence, this might not be the case in health insurance policies, since they typically only cover medical expenses.
'As per the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), death claims attributable to medical negligence, if any, are not excluded under life insurance policy contracts, and such death claims are settled in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy contract and the extant regulations governing the settlement of claims', explains Devansh Jain, Partner, PSL Advocates & Solicitors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
14 hours ago
- Indian Express
High costs of life-saving drugs leave patients of rare diseases in the lurch: Will their crusade for Indian variants win?
For Seba P A, 26, from Kerala, the cost of breathing easy, moving around and enduring fewer bouts of infection comes at a steep price — nearly Rs 18 lakh per month. For long, she had managed with the Rs 50 lakh government grant under the national policy of rare diseases, one of which — Spinal Muscular Atrophy — she is battling. Now she is on a crusade to make life-saving drugs, currently under patents, affordable for persons suffering from rare diseases. Suffering from Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), a rare disease that progressively affects muscle functions, her condition can be managed with Risdiplam. Developed by Swiss pharma giant Roche, one bottle of Risdiplam costs around Rs 6 lakh in India — something her taxi driver father cannot afford. In a bid to make the life-altering medicine affordable for SMA patients like herself, Seba had in December 2023 filed a petition in the Kerala High Court urging the government to invoke the compulsory licensing clause under Section 84 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970. This allows the Indian government to grant someone other than the patent holder the right to make the medicine if a product or process is nationally unavailable or overpriced. Roche holds the patent for Risdiplam till May 2035. Her case is now being heard in the Supreme Court. 'If other companies start manufacturing the drug, the prices are likely to plummet,' says Seba. Like her, patients suffering from rare diseases, who need life-long therapy, have been urging the government to invoke the compulsory licensing clause. WHY PATIENTS OF RARE DISEASES RAN OUT OF OPTIONS Two years ago, Seba's family had applied for financial aid under the Centre's National Policy for Rare Diseases, 2021, which had identified 1,000 patients, including Seba, for a one-time financial assistance of Rs 50 lakh each. 'When I was taking Risdiplam, my health was stable. I was able to speak and sing. However, the funds got exhausted in mid-February. Since then, I have already had two bouts of infections and have been confined to bed,' Seba, who loves singing and painting, tells The Indian Express. Though she is back on Risdiplam, being provided by Roche free of cost for a year while the case is on, it continues to be out of reach to other SMA patients. The mother of a 14-year-old boy from Bengaluru has been struggling to obtain medicine to treat his cystic fibrosis (CF), a genetic condition that affects cells that produce mucus, sweat and digestive juices, making them thick and sticky, clogging up lungs and the digestive system. In 2019, Trikafta, a three-drug combination sold by US-based Vertex, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for CF treatment. 'Importing a three-month supply costs Rs 70 lakh. An Argentina company manufactures a slightly cheaper version that costs around Rs 21 lakh for a three-month supply,' she says. She is one of the petitioners urging the government to grant a compulsory license for the medicine. In an attempt to get the medicine from Argentina, the mother scours Facebook for Indians living there and requests them to get the medicine when they come home. 'I split the tablets to make them last at least six months. If Indian companies are given compulsory licences, I might be able to afford medicines for my son,' she says. WHAT'S THE STATUS OF COMPULSORY LICENSING CLAUSE? Despite the exorbitant cost of drugs used to manage rare diseases, India's compulsory licensing clause has been used just once in 20 years. 'Only one private company got a compulsory license once,' says Anand Grover, a senior lawyer who works on such patent cases, referring to the New Delhi-based Natco Pharma, which secured the permit to manufacture Nexavar, a cancer drug made by German multinational Bayer, in 2012. Since then, three Indian companies have unsuccessfully applied for compulsory licences — BDR Pharmaceuticals for Dasatinib (for leukemia), Lee Pharma for Sitagliptin (for diabetes), and Emcure Pharmaceuticals for Trastuzumab (for breast cancer), says Sneha Sharma, a partner at Sujata Chaudhri IP Attorneys. ROCHE VS NATCO In 2024, Roche Pharmaceuticals had filed a petition to get an injunction, claiming that Natco Pharmaceutical was in the process of launching a generic version of Risdiplam. Though its injunction was denied by the Delhi High Court in March 2025, the Swiss drug-maker has filed an appeal. The Division Bench has heard the arguments in the case and is now awaiting written statements from both parties. Meanwhile, Natco announced that if it is allowed to manufacture and market the generic version of Risdiplam, it will sell it for just Rs 15,900 per bottle (against Roche's Rs 6 lakh per bottle). Though Roche's assistance programme provides five bottles at the cost of two, patients still end up spending nearly Rs 30 lakh annually. A generic version of Risdiplam would mean that the government's Rs 50-lakh aid will last almost nine years instead of just a few months for SMA patients. Risdiplam is sold for around $500 (around Rs 42,000) per bottle in China and Pakistan. 'Risdiplam costs less in China and Pakistan where prices were negotiated with the company. Since that did not happen in India, a simple solution would be to issue a compulsory license to Natco,' says Grover. He also challenged the narrative put forth by the Swiss drug-maker, which said that a drug's exorbitant prices were meant to cover the 'high costs' of research and development (R & D). In its suit against Natco, Roche had said that it takes a company nearly 10-15 years and an estimated $2.6 billion (nearly Rs 260 crore) to bring a successful drug to the market. The company had claimed that only one in nearly 5,000 or 10,000 drugs in the research pipeline and around 12% of those in clinical trials get approved. 'Many drugs are, in fact, developed by smaller companies that are acquired by bigger ones and taken to clinical trials. Big companies often hold these patents despite not bearing initial costs of developing several candidate drugs. The figures these companies have been giving out for years are an exaggeration. Which is why we ask for actual costs the companies incur on drug R & D,' says Grover. He says studies have shown that the cost of developing Risdiplam would, at most, be $150 million, a figure that has not yet been contested by the company. HOW PHARMA MAJORS PROLONG PATENT CONTROL Pharma giants find loopholes to prolong their control over a drug. When it comes to Trikafta, the CF drug, Vertex Pharmaceuticals already holds the patent for two of these medicines in India while an application for the third is in process. 'In a blatant abuse of its monopoly, Vertex has filed and obtained multiple patents in India, thus having monopoly rights on various CFTR modulators (a class of medications designed for individuals with CF). But it has not bothered to register the medicine in India,' states a 2024 petition by CF patients in the Karnataka High Court. Sharma says a compulsory licence may also be issued if a patent holder has not worked the patent in over three years. PATENTING PHARMACEUTICALS IN INDIA When the country's new patent law was brought out in the 1970s, the government created a very important provision — it allowed for only process patenting when it came to pharmaceuticals. 'After the British left, drugs in India were very costly. A committee set up by (then PM) Mrs (Indira) Gandhi recommended dropping product patenting for pharmaceuticals. If a product is patented, you cannot do anything. But if a process is patented, you can legally make a similar drug using another process. That is what was done under the new Patent Act that came into force in 1972,' says Grover. This decision was key to the generic manufacturing of pharmaceuticals in India, earning the country the moniker of the 'pharmacy of the world.' Meanwhile, the US, which wanted to create a monopoly for itself, forced the world to accept the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, which came into effect on January 1, 1995. While countries like Brazil, Mexico and India initially formed a block against TRIPS, threats of sanctions forced them to toe the line. India was given time till 2005 to implement provisions similar to the ones in the US — ensuring product patents and extending patent period from seven to 20 years, explains Grover. In fact, India's Patent Act, which allowed only the process to be patented, became the reason why Indian drug-maker Cipla could establish itself as the 'Robin Hood' of pharmaceuticals. In 2001, the company started selling a cocktail of antiretrovirals (medicines used to manage HIV) for less than $1 a day, driving down the prices of the medication across the world. Grover says, '(Despite TRIPS), we still tried to maintain some provisions that would help our people. Our law does not allow extending patents simply by changing the medicine's form or replacing some salts (a process called ever-greening of patents) unless there is a significant change in its efficacy. Our law also allows for both pre and post-grant opposition.' Anonna Dutt is a Principal Correspondent who writes primarily on health at the Indian Express. She reports on myriad topics ranging from the growing burden of non-communicable diseases such as diabetes and hypertension to the problems with pervasive infectious conditions. She reported on the government's management of the Covid-19 pandemic and closely followed the vaccination programme. Her stories have resulted in the city government investing in high-end tests for the poor and acknowledging errors in their official reports. Dutt also takes a keen interest in the country's space programme and has written on key missions like Chandrayaan 2 and 3, Aditya L1, and Gaganyaan. She was among the first batch of eleven media fellows with RBM Partnership to End Malaria. She was also selected to participate in the short-term programme on early childhood reporting at Columbia University's Dart Centre. Dutt has a Bachelor's Degree from the Symbiosis Institute of Media and Communication, Pune and a PG Diploma from the Asian College of Journalism, Chennai. She started her reporting career with the Hindustan Times. When not at work, she tries to appease the Duolingo owl with her French skills and sometimes takes to the dance floor. ... Read More
Mint
3 days ago
- Mint
NEET PG 2025 to be conducted on August 3 in a single shift: Supreme Court
Written By Riya R Alex Updated 6 Jun 2025, 12:20 PM IST Supreme Court allows NEET PG 2025 Exam on August 3.(PTI) The Supreme Court has permitted the National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences to conduct the National Board of Examinations (NEET PG 2025) exam on August 3 in a single session. The top court also clarified that no additional time will be granted to the NEET-PG 2025.
The Hindu
3 days ago
- The Hindu
NEET PG 2025: Supreme Court approves August 3 exam date, one-shift format confirmed
The Supreme Court allows the National Board of Examinations (NBE) to hold the NEET-PG 2025 examination on August 3, 2025, in one shift. SC says no further time will be granted to NBE for holding NEET PG 2025. The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) had postponed NEET PG 2025 following a recent Supreme Court order that the exam shall be held in one shift. In the order, the court had ordered complete transparency and that secure test centres shall be identified and commissioned. The NBEMS had said in a statement that the NEET PG exam scheduled for May 15 has been postponed to arrange for additional test centres and required infrastructure.
