M/s. Spring Meadows Hospital & others Vs. Harjol Ahluwalia through K.S. Ahluwalia and another[1]:

Introduction:             These two appeals arise out of the order dated 16 June 97 passed by National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi, in which the question of liability to pay compensation.  In this case it is alleged that a minor was being treated in a nursing home but as there was no improvement in his health the minor was brought to M/s. Spring Meadows Hospital.  In the Hospital the patient was examined by the Senior Consultant Pediatrician Dr. Promila Bhutani and on the advice of said doctor the patient was admitted in the Hospital.  The doctor made the diagnosis that the patient was suffering from typhoid and intimated the parents that medicines have been prescribed for the treatment.  Ms. Bina Mathew, nurse of the Hospital asked the father of the minor patient to get the injection – Inj. Lariago – to be administered intravenously to the minor patient.  The father thereafter brought the injection and the nurse injected the same to the minor patient.  The patient immediately on been injected collapsed while still in the lap of his mother.  It was further alleged that before administering the injection the nurse had not made any sensitive test on the patient Thereafter a resident doctor Dhananjay attended the patient who told that the child had suffered by Cardiac Arrest and then by manually pumping the chest the doctor attempts to revive the heartbeat.  Thereafter the child was put on manual respirator and kept alive on the manual ventilator but the condition of the child did not show any improvement.  Thereafter the child was removed for auto-respirator to Pediatric Intensive Care Unit of the All India Institute of Medical Science.  The doctors of the Institute examine the minor child thoroughly and informed the parents that the child is critical and even if he would survive, he would live only in a vegetative state as irreparable damage had been caused to his brain and there was no chance of revival of the damaged part.  Thereafter the patient was discharged after informing the parents that no useful purpose would be served.  The complainant alleged that the child on account of negligence and deficiency on the part of Hospital authorities suffered irreparable damages and could survive only as a mere vegetative and accordingly claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 28,00,000/-

The commission then determined the quantum of compensation and awarded 12.5 lakhs as compensation to the minor patient in addition to the aforesaid sum the Commission also awarded Rs. 5 lakhs as compensation to be paid to the parent of the minor child for acute mental agony that has been caused to the parents by reason of their only son having been reduced to vegetative state, requiring lifelong care and attention.  The S.C. dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decision of Commission and also awarded cost Rs.  5000 to respondent.

Now it is also held in this case that as per Section 2(1) (d) (ii) a consumer would mean a person who hires or Aviles of any services and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who hires or Aviles of services.

[1] AIR, 1998, S.C. 1801.