National Consumer Commission Sets Aside Medical Negligence Finding Against Ajanta Hospital In Bedsores-Related Death Case

Brief Facts of the Case:

The complainants, family members of late Shyam Sundar Chaturvedi, filed a complaint against Ajanta Hospital & IVF Centre Pvt. Ltd. and its doctors, alleging medical negligence in his treatment

According to the complaint, the deceased—aged over 75—was admitted to Ajanta Hospital on 30.09.2014, presenting with multiple age-related ailments, diabetes, hypertension, history of strokes, seizure disorder, cervical compression, chronic kidney disease, and significant physical frailty. He also suffered from bedsores requiring intensive care.

The complainants alleged that adequate medical attention and nursing care were not provided during his hospital stay, resulting in unmanaged bedsores, infections, and worsening health.

The patient was discharged on 09.10.2014 with instructions for timely follow-up, but he remained at home and did not return as advised.

Subsequently, the patient was admitted to Sushrat Institute of Plastic Surgery (SIPS) Hospital on 18.10.2014, where he stayed for only two days before leaving against medical advice. Thereafter, he was admitted to Sahara Hospital on 20.10.2014, where he remained under treatment until his death on 09.11.2014.

The complainants filed a case before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh, alleging medical negligence by Ajanta Hospital and the treating doctor.

The State Commission, after examining the evidence, held Ajanta Hospital and its doctor liable for medical negligence and awarded compensation of ₹5 lakh to the complainants. The Commission, however, did not find SIPS Hospital or Sahara Hospital negligent in the treatment of the patient.

Dissatisfied with this decision, Ajanta Hospital and the concerned doctor (the appellants herein) filed an appeal before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, challenging the imposition of liability and claiming that adequate medical care had been provided during the patient's stay, and that the patient's subsequent health deterioration was due to his pre-existing conditions and his decision not to follow the hospital's advice after discharge.

Contentions of the Complainants :

The complainants alleged that Ajanta Hospital failed to provide adequate nursing care and medical attention to their father, leading to the development and worsening of Stage-IV bedsores and infections while in the ICU. They further claimed that poor communication and deficient follow-up advice by the hospital and doctor contributed directly to his declining health and subsequent death, amounting to service deficiency and medical negligence.

Contentions of the Appellants:

The appellants argued that the patient received timely and appropriate treatment, including management of bedsores and regular monitoring, but his multiple serious health conditions made him highly vulnerable. They maintained that after discharge, the patient remained at home against medical advice and later approached other hospitals, so subsequent deterioration could not be attributed to Ajanta Hospital or its staff. Relying on the Uttar Pradesh Medical Council's Ethics Committee report, they contended that the development of bedsores and the patient's death were consequences of his underlying illnesses, with no negligence on their part.

Observations and Decision of the Commission:

The Commission observed that the patient's bedsores were first noted on 06.10.2014 at Ajanta Hospital, and immediate treatment, including dressing and regular monitoring, was provided. Nurses' and doctors' records confirmed proper care, including turning the patient and timely administration of medicines.

After discharge on 09.10.2014, the patient did not return as advised for follow-up and voluntarily got admitted to SIPS Hospital and then Sahara Hospital. Any worsening of his condition during this period was due to his own choices and could not be attributed to the appellants.

Considering the patient's advanced age and serious pre-existing conditions—diabetes, hypertension, past strokes, ischemic infarction, seizure disorder, chronic kidney disease, and cervical compression—complications like bedsores were natural. The Ethics Committee of the Uttar Pradesh Medical Council also found no negligence by the hospital or the doctor.

The Commission concluded that the State Commission's order holding the appellants liable and awarding ₹5 lakh was not justified. Accordingly, the order against the appellants was set aside, the appeal was partly allowed, and any statutory deposit made by the appellants was to be refunded.

Case Title: Ajay Chaturvedi & Ors. vs. Ajanta Hospital & IVF Centre Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Case No.: FIRST APPEAL NO. 831 of 2022

Click Here To Read/Download The Order