In Brief
A 13-year-old boy lost complete vision in his right eye following cataract surgery performed by the respondent doctors. The District Consumer Disputes Commission found the doctors negligent, awarding compensation. Higher consumer forums reversed this, relying solely on a Medical Council report. The Supreme Court held that appellate forums cannot mechanically rely on regulatory reports while ignoring uncontroverted expert evidence of negligence in pre- and post-operative care. The Court reaffirmed that medical duty of care extends beyond surgery to include proper post-operative review and rehabilitation. The appeal was allowed and the original compensation order was restored.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.