Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by the State of Punjab against the judgment and order dated 29/10/2001 in RSA No.4289/1999, which had reversed a previous appellate court's decision regarding compensation for medical negligence. The respondent, Smt. Basso, underwent a tubectomy operation on 23/2/1987 at Civil Hospital, Sardulgarh, District Mansa, but subsequently became pregnant, alleging that this was due to a defective operation performed by the doctors. She initially sought compensation of Rs.3,00,000, but the trial court awarded only Rs.50,000. The State appealed this decision, leading to the appellate court dismissing her claim. However, the High Court later reversed this dismissal and upheld the Rs.50,000 compensation. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court's decision relied on an earlier case, State of Haryana Vs. Santra, which had been implicitly overruled by subsequent judgments from a three-Judge Bench. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and did not impose any costs.
Headnote
A) Medical Negligence - Compensation for Defective Operation - Award of Compensation - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The respondent claimed compensation for pregnancy resulting from a defective tubectomy operation. The High Court's award of Rs.50,000 was set aside as it was inconsistent with subsequent Supreme Court decisions that overruled earlier precedents. Held that the appeal was allowed and the High Court's order was set aside (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court's award of compensation was justified in light of subsequent judicial precedents.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and did not impose costs.
Law Points
- Medical negligence
- Compensation
- Defective operation
- Appeal process
- Judicial precedent
