In a landmark decision, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) criticized the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Commission for its excessive reliance on information downloaded from Google in determining a case of alleged medical negligence. The NCDRC pointed out that neither the parties involved nor the State Commission were aware of this material being used to support the judgment, nor did either side submit it.
The case, identified as First Appeal No. 326 of 2024, was brought forward by Vivekanand Polyclinic and Institute of Medical Sciences and Dr. Javed Ahmed. They challenged an order dated March 21, 2024, issued by the State Commission in Complaint No. CC/238/2015. The appellants were represented by advocates Mr. Pranav Upadhyay, Mr. Rishabh Khare, and Mr. Navneeth R.
The respondents in the case include Mahesh Chandra Rastogi, Smt. Manju Rastogi, Dr. Pradeep Gupta, Dr. Jigyasu Singh, and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. The background of the case reveals that Mahesh Chandra Rastogi’s husband and children were admitted to the Trauma Centre at Vivekanand Polyclinic and Institute of Medical Sciences following a referral from the Trauma Centre itself. Tragically, the treatment allegedly resulted in the death of Rastogi’s husband due to claimed medical negligence.
The State Commission had previously awarded compensation exceeding one crore rupees against the Vivekanand Multi-specialty Hospital in Lucknow for the death attributed to medical negligence.
Key Observations by the NCDRC:
1. Use of Google Downloads: The NCDRC expressed concern over the State Commission’s heavy reliance on material downloaded from Google to substantiate its reasoning on the alleged medical negligence. It was noted that neither the appellants nor the respondents were informed about this material, nor was it provided by any party involved.
2. Procedural Impropriety: The NCDRC criticized the method of using Google-sourced material to decide the case, highlighting that it was not an appropriate procedure.
3. Prima Facie Case: The NCDRC recognized that the issues raised in the appeal warranted consideration.
In its order dated May 27, 2024, a bench led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.P. Sahi, President of the NCDRC, admitted the appeal and scheduled the matter for further hearing on October 29, 2024. Additionally, the court directed the appellant to deposit Rs. 5,00,000/- with the State Commission within four weeks. This amount is to be placed in an interest-bearing fixed deposit at a nationalized bank. The court also ordered a stay on further execution proceedings, contingent upon this deposit.
This decision underscores the importance of adhering to proper procedures and the risks of relying on unsanctioned information sources in legal proceedings.
To get free legal advice:https://www.advotalks.com/
For More Legal Updates visit our youtube channel
.jpeg&w=80&h=80&crop-to-fit)
