JUDGEMENT

Its time for moving onto the judgement . we heard the arguments from both
sides of the counsels for plaintiff and defendant . the court has examined in
detail all the submission from both the parties

Special leave petition filed under Art 136 of Indian Constitution in the matter of
VIJENDRA
v.
ABILASHA & MG HOSPITAL

The issues to be discussed here in are:

ISSUE 1
Whether the Special Leave Petition is maintainable?
The court is in the view that the petitioner who filed the petition was
maintainable under 136 0f the constitution of india .the Supreme Court may, in
its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree,
determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any
court or tribunal in the territory of India.. While considering the facts about the
case The case involves the matter of general public importance and it directly
and substantially affects the rights of the petitioner as the order is erroneous
and prejudicial to the interest of petitioner.
In this instant matter the substantial question of law of general public
importance arises , hence the special leave petition filed by the petitioner under
the art 136 of the Indian constitution is maintainable.

ISSUE 2
Whether the hospital is vicariously liable for act done by the doctor?
 The medical profession is considered a noble profession because it
helps in preserving life . The petitioner have suffered a irretrievable damage
from the part of the hospital, in order to provide the complete justice the court
came into the conclusion that the petitioner Vijendra suffered serious damage
to his spine and consequently was unable to work even as a software engineer
and suffered considerable pain. The loss that occurred to the petitioner was a
permanent one . consent was an one of the most important factor while dealing
with an surgery once if the patient was not in the position to give the consents
due to:
a) The patient is incapacitated,
b) Life-threatening emergencies with inadequate time to obtain consent,
c) Voluntary waived consent.
By going through the facts the court came into finding that the patient was
not in the any of the exceptions, and foud out that there was clear negligence
from the hospital authority , the doctor was critical of this research and knew
that recent research had suggested that the new procedure carried a small risk
of damaging the spine. The doctor had informed his wife about his situation and
the procedures to undergo , including Lumbar Decompression Surgery for Spinal
Stenosis, and had taken her signed consent in the hospital form, without
informing them about the risk factor involved in the surgery.

ISSUE 3
Whether there is any negligence on the part of mother?

Negligence is the breach of duty caused by the omission to do something which

a reasonable man, guided by those principles which ordinarily regulate the
conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a reasonable
prudent and reasonable person would not do. Abhilasha omitted her act which
she was reasonably supposed to do in normal circumstances. Instead of taking
special care of her daughter & checking whether her daughter is taking
medicine on time or not she did not act in a proper way due to which Asha’s
mental illness grew .Abhilasha was aware of that the neighbours were already
victims of Asha’s act, but she did not give much importance to it. she had the
knowledge about previous acts of her daughter, she did not take care of Asha
which a prudent person would have done. Because of her negligence Asha
pushed Vijendra from the sunshade and ended in Vijendra getting hurt badly in
the spine.So She is negligent