NEW DELHI: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has held a surgeon guilty of gross medical negligence for removing a patient’s healthy kidney instead of the diseased one, an error that ultimately led to her death.
In an order dated May 18, a bench comprising NCDRC President A. P. Sahi and member Bharatkumar Pandya awarded the victim’s family a total compensation of ₹2 crore in the case Veer Singh & Ors. v Dr Rajeev Lochan, according to a report by Bar and Bench.
Healthy kidney removed during surgery
The case involved Shanti Devi, who was diagnosed with severe hydronephrosis in April 2012 — a condition that caused dangerous fluid accumulation in her right kidney.
Medical imaging and ultrasound reports conducted before surgery clearly showed that her right kidney was diseased while her left kidney was healthy.
The surgery had been planned specifically for removal of the damaged right kidney. However, radiological and CT scan reports taken after the procedure in June 2012 revealed that the diseased right kidney was still intact, while the healthy left kidney had been removed.
With only the dysfunctional right kidney remaining, Shanti Devi underwent repeated dialysis for nearly two years before dying on February 20, 2014.
‘Medical disaster and negligence of highest order’
The Commission directly linked her prolonged suffering and eventual death to the surgical error.
Observing that the patient would likely have survived longer had the healthy kidney remained intact, the NCDRC described the mistake as a “medical disaster”.
“The removal of the left kidney was a medical disaster and a negligence of the highest order. Had the left kidney remained intact, the patient would have survived longer,” the Commission observed, as quoted by Bar and Bench.
The order further noted that once the healthy kidney was removed and the diseased kidney failed, the patient had virtually no chance of survival.
Surgeon’s defence rejected
The surgeon argued that it was anatomically impossible to remove the left kidney through a right-side surgical incision and claimed he could not have imagined such an occurrence.
However, the Commission rejected the defence.
It pointed out that the surgery had been specifically planned as a right-side nephrectomy and that the surgeon himself had recorded “right side nephrectomy” in post-operative documents.
The Commission also found no evidence of any separate procedure that could explain the absence of the healthy left kidney.
“Had the left kidney remained intact and had not been removed by the OP (surgeon), the same would have helped in the survival of the patient, but with its removal and the right failed kidney, the complainant had no hope for survival. This act and negligence of the OP therefore deserves to be heavily compensated,” the order stated.
Medical councils had earlier found negligence
The ruling was further strengthened by findings from medical regulatory bodies.
The Uttar Pradesh Medical Council had earlier found the surgeon negligent, suspended his medical registration for two years and recorded that a forged case sheet had been produced in the matter.
That finding was later upheld by the Medical Council of India.
While noting that the family had not produced exact monetary calculations for damages, the Commission held that the irreversible nature of the harm, the patient’s age, the loss suffered by the family and the direct causal link between negligence and death justified substantial compensation.
Can patients sue hospitals for negligence?
Under Indian law, patients and their families can seek legal remedies against hospitals and doctors through multiple forums, including consumer commissions under the Consumer Protection Act, civil courts for damages, criminal complaints in cases involving extreme negligence, and medical councils for disciplinary action against healthcare professionals.
