New Delhi: In a case of alleged medical negligence, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has ruled that a delay in registering with the State Medical Council, despite being qualified and listed on the Indian Medical Register with the privilege to practice nationwide, does not constitute medical negligence or deficiency in service.
The matter dates back to 1994 when a pregnant woman, in the early stages of her second pregnancy, sought treatment from a gynaecologist who assured her of a normal delivery. However, after her expected delivery date passed without labor pains, the patient was admitted to the hospital where the doctor practiced. Labor was induced using cerviprime and Pitocin. Following the administration of Pitocin, the patient developed severe allergic reactions, leading to complications including uterine rupture and a subsequent hysterectomy.
The complainant alleged that no medical personnel were present during the Pitocin administration and claimed the forceps delivery was reckless, resulting in significant complications for both mother and child. She sought compensation of ₹3,00,250, alleging negligence in blood transfusion and deficiencies in care.
The doctor and hospital denied the allegations, stating that labor induction was medically necessary, and complications were managed promptly. They argued that cross-matching was conducted before the blood transfusion, revealing the patient’s blood group as AB-negative, contrary to her husband’s earlier claim of O-positive. They administered compatible blood, ensuring patient safety.
The District Commission dismissed the complaint, but the State Commission found negligence regarding discrepancies in identifying the patient’s blood group and ordered compensation of ₹2 lakh with 8% interest and ₹50,000 in litigation costs.
When the case reached NCDRC, the complainant’s counsel further argued that the doctor lacked State Medical Council registration during the treatment. The doctor’s counsel contended that such omission did not constitute negligence but was subject to regulatory action by the relevant council.
The NCDRC observed that all allegations except the blood transfusion issue were dismissed by previous fora. It concluded that the hospital and doctor had conducted an independent blood matching test before transfusion and administered a medically acceptable blood group, establishing no negligence or deficiency in service.
Regarding the doctor’s registration, the NCDRC referred to the Indian Medical Council Act, noting that her qualification and inclusion in the Indian Medical Register granted her the privilege to practice nationwide. It stated that subsequent registration with the State Medical Council did not impact the treatment provided.
The NCDRC dismissed the complaint, setting aside the State Commission’s order, and affirmed no medical negligence or deficiency in service was established.
Here is order copy :