Lucknow: High Court Overturns NCDRC Verdict
Lucknow: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court recently quashed an order by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) that directed a doctor and a hospital owner to pay ₹93 lakh compensation to a patient who suffered complications during a C-section procedure.
Background of the Case
The case dates back to 2005, involving a petitioner doctor running Surya Medical Centre. The patient, regularly visiting the center during her pregnancy, underwent a C-section on the doctor’s advice. Post-surgery complications arose, allegedly due to the unavailability of oxygen, leading to the patient developing Hypoxia Ischemic Encephalopathy (HIE).
The patient subsequently sought treatment at another nursing home and later at SGPGI, alleging medical negligence and filing a complaint before the State Consumer Forum.
State and NCDRC Rulings
- State Forum Decision (2012): Ordered ₹95 lakh compensation in favor of the patient.
- NCDRC Decision (2021): After differing views from two members, a third member upheld ₹93 lakh compensation with reduced interest.
HC Observations on Section 58(3)
The High Court examined the procedural irregularities in how the third member of the NCDRC handled the matter:
- The third member should have decided only the points of disagreement between the two initial members, as per Section 58(3) of the Consumer Protection Act.
- Instead, the third member endorsed one member’s view without addressing the five referred questions, violating the act’s mandate.
Court’s Decision
The HC ruled that the NCDRC exceeded its jurisdiction and improperly exercised its powers. It set aside the ₹93 lakh compensation order, directing the matter to be reheard by the third member solely on the referred points.
Key Takeaways
- Mandate of Section 58(3): Courts must adhere to the procedural framework when resolving member disagreements in consumer forums.
- Improper Jurisdiction Exercise: Overstepping defined roles undermines judicial credibility and fairness.
- Fresh Hearing Ordered: The case will return to the NCDRC for reevaluation based on the HC directive.
The High Court’s judgment underscores the importance of adhering to legal procedures in consumer disputes while safeguarding the interests of both patients and medical professionals.
