A pregnant lady grievously injured in a road accident had to undergo a surgery known as foetal distress surgery five days after the incident and gave birth to a baby who had to be kept in ICU. The baby died after two days. The lady claimed compensation separately on account of the death of her child. The tribunal awarded compensation of Rs 1,50,000 towards the child’s death. On appeal, it was contended that as the child was not born on the day of the accident, compensation is not payable on account of his death. Relying upon the evidence of the doctor the Karnataka High Court held that though there is no direct impact between the vehicle and the baby, the baby died due to injuries received while in the womb. According to the doctor’s evidence, if the foetus had completed 37 weeks, even a still- born is considered a child. The decision of the tribunal was upheld (Division Controller, B.T.S. Division, Bangalore vs Vidya Shinde).
On advice that domiciliary oxygen treatment was required at home, a retired government employee had to buy an imported oxygen concentrator at a price of Rs 56,100. The authorities refused to reimburse the amount on the ground that oxygen concentrator was a hospital equipment and long-term oxygen facility can be provided by oxygen cylinders and Central Government Health Service (CGHS) has provisions for supply of oxygen cylinders. The Delhi High Court held that nothing in the rules excludes use of domici- liary oxygen. In fact, government instructi- ons permit reimbursement of cost of medi- cal equipments like heart valves, etc. if such use is prescribed by a specialist in the gove- rnment/ recognised hospital. As the said list is not exhaustive, oxygen concentrator can also be supplied. The high court directed reimbursement of the amount along with interest (P.R. Kanwar vs Union of India).
At the time of consultation, the patient informed the doctor that she was allergic to penicillin. After the removal of a cyst from her gum, she was prescribed Pentids. After consuming the same she became comatose and died. It was submitted that the patient had not informed the doctor about such an allergy. If a patient is allergic to anything, it is noted in a chart, which was not done here. The Kerala High Court held that the absence of such notings will not lead to the conclu- sion that the deceased had not informed of an allergy. Compensation of Rs 1,50,000 by the court below was upheld by the high court (Lisie Hospital vs D.V. Ajaykumar) .
SOLON
