Contradictions In Medical Records: NCDRC Holds Max Hospital, Cardiologist Liable For Medical Negligence

Update: 2026-08-07 03:23 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), comprising Dr. Inderjit Singh, Presiding Member, and Mr. Shashi Nandkeolyar, Member, upheld the finding of medical negligence against cardiologist Dr. Sudheer Saxena and held Max Super Specialty Hospital, Mohali, vicariously liable for the negligent treatment that resulted in the patient's death.

The Commission observed that the hospital and the treating doctor failed to satisfactorily explain the contradictions in the medical records, X-ray reports, nursing notes, and billing documents, which raised serious doubts about the treatment provided.

Facts

The complainant, Pooja Gupta, filed a consumer complaint alleging medical negligence against Max Super Specialty Hospital, Mohali, its treating cardiologist Dr. Sudheer Saxena, and others following the death of her husband, Rishi Gupta, aged about 43 years. The deceased, who had a history of severe heart disease and had earlier undergone Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery, was admitted to the hospital on 17 September 2013 with prolonged chest pain. The treating doctor advised implantation of a biventricular (triple-chamber) pacemaker, and a treatment package of around ₹5.5 lakh was discussed.

According to the complainant, after depositing ₹3 lakh, the doctor performed surgery on 20 September 2013, allegedly implanted a double-chamber pacemaker costing ₹45,000 instead of the recommended biventricular pacemaker, and left the procedure incomplete. On 22 September 2013, another surgery was conducted in which a biventricular pacemaker worth ₹4,47,869 was implanted. The patient was discharged on 24 September 2013, but suffered a heart attack and died on 27 September 2013. Alleging that the treatment, medical records and billing reflected gross negligence and deficiency in service, the complainant sought ₹84,73,036 as compensation before the Punjab State Consumer Commission.

The Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held Dr. Sudheer Saxena guilty of medical negligence and held Max Super Specialty Hospital vicariously liable. It directed them to jointly pay ₹32.94 lakh as compensation to the complainant, while dismissing the complaint against the other opposite parties.

Aggrieved by the order, Dr. Sudheer Saxena and Max Super Specialty Hospital filed an appeal before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) challenging the finding of medical negligence. On the other hand, the complainant also filed a cross-appeal seeking enhancement of compensation, contending that the amount awarded by the State Commission was inadequate considering the death of the family's sole breadwinner.

Observations and decision

The NCDRC held that the hospital and the treating doctor failed to satisfactorily explain the contradictions in the medical records, X-ray report, nursing notes and billing documents, which indicated negligence in the treatment provided to the patient. The Commission upheld the finding that Dr. Sudheer Saxena was guilty of medical negligence and that Max Super Specialty Hospital was vicariously liable for his acts.

The NCDRC dismissed both the appeals, holding that the Punjab State Commission's award of ₹32.94 lakh was just, fair and reasonable. It also found no evidence of any defect in the pacemaker to fasten liability on the manufacturer and, therefore, upheld the State Commission's order in its entirety.

Case Details: Dr. Sudheer Saxena & Anr. v. Pooja Gupta & Ors. (First Appeal No. 1495 of 2017) along with Pooja Gupta v. Max Super Specialty Hospital & Ors. (First Appeal No. 1751 of 2017)

Appearances:

FIRST APPEAL NO, 1495 of 2017

For the Appellants: Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Abhinav Tyagi, Advocate

For Respondent: Mr. Bhavnik Mehta, Advocate along with Mrs. Puja Gupta, Respondent No.l and her son Mr. Vinay Gupta in person

FIRST APPEAL NO, 1751 of 2017

For the Appellant: Mr. Bhavnik Mehta, Advocate along with Mrs. Puja Gupta, Appellant and her son

For the Respondents No. 1 & 3 : Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Tyagi, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Tags:    

Similar News