Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

“Cal. High Court Sets Aside WBCERC Award, Observes ‘Double Standards’ in Medical Negligence Case”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the High Court at Calcutta has set aside an award by the West Bengal Clinical Establishment Regulatory Commission (WBCERC) that directed Park Hospitals to pay Rs. 20 lakh for alleged medical negligence. The case revolved around the unfortunate demise of Dr. Shraddha Bhutra, who was pregnant and under the care of Dr. Supriya Khetan.

The High Court observed that the Commission applied “double standards” in its judgment. “The Commission ought to have adverted to the aforesaid factors and yardsticks while deciding the issue of compensation,” the Court noted in Para 37 of the judgment.

The Court pointed out that Park Hospitals was not solely to blame for the tragic incident. “It is clear that Belle Vue kept the patient waiting for at least 35 minutes at a crucial juncture, immediately after which the patient met her demise,” the Court stated in Para 33.

The matter has been remanded for re-adjudication. “The matter is remanded to the respondent no.1-Commission for a re-adjudication, upon giving opportunity to the parties to produce further evidence,” the Court directed in Para 38.

The Court also highlighted the roles of other hospitals, including Apollo and Belle Vue, stating that they too played roles in the unfortunate series of events. “The Commission did not properly assess the roles of all involved Clinical Establishments,” the Court observed in Para 29.

The Commission has been directed to complete the re-adjudication as soon as possible, “preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order to the Commission,” as per Para 38 of the judgment.

This ruling is expected to have significant implications for medical negligence cases, particularly those involving multiple clinical establishments.

D.D-30.Aug.2023

Park Hospitals and another vs The West Bengal Clinical Establishment  Regulatory Commission and another

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Park_Hospital_Vs_WB_30Aug23_CalHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News