The Medical Council had exonerated Dr Agarwal of negligence. But the Consumer Commission held him guilty because he was an allopathic doctor who had prescribed an ayurvedic drug
A Delhi consumer court has held a hospital and its doctor liable for negligence in the death of a dengue patient, awarding ₹5,000 in compensation after 15 years of litigation. (Photo: AdobeStock)
Shyam Sunder’s son, Vishal, was suffering from a low fever and pain in the abdomen. He had also vomited. On November 1, 2010, he was taken to Health Point Hospital, run by Dr Rajesh Agarwal, where he was admitted around 2 pm. Doctors found that he was suffering from dengue.
Around 10 pm, when his temperature increased, the doctor on duty examined the boy and asked the nurse to administer an injection. Soon thereafter, the boy’s condition worsened. White froth started emanating from his mouth, and he became unconscious. The doctor advised that he be shifted to the emergency section of a nearby hospital, where doctors pronounced him dead. They stated that he had died about 30 minutes before arrival.
Shyam Sunder took his son’s dead body back to Health Point Hospital. The police were also called. The body was then taken to the All India Institute for Medical Studies (Aiims) for a post-mortem.
Shyam Sunder filed a complaint before the South II District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Delhi against Health Point Hospital, its owner Dr Rajesh Agarwal, and the doctor on duty. He alleged that the hospital had represented that it provided round-the-clock emergency services, but did not even have an ambulance or ventilator. There was no prescription or other documentation to show what medication had been administered. He further alleged that after his child expired, the hospital referred him to another hospital to escape liability. He claimed compensation for death due to negligence in treatment.
The hospital contested the complaint. It claimed that it was administering proper treatment with IV fluids, antibiotics, and antiviral medication. However, the child suddenly developed respiratory distress, because of which the injection Hycort 100 mg was administered. The hospital stated that this is a lifesaving drug and is given only in extreme conditions. It argued that an ambulance and ventilator are not essential requirements for providing emergency service. It alleged that the patient had not been referred to another hospital, but that the parents had left the hospital forcefully. They had also manhandled the doctors, who had to be rescued by the police. The hospital contended that the complaint should be dismissed as there was no negligence on its part and no expert opinion had been produced to support the allegations.
The Commission observed that the child had been treated by quacks prior to his being brought to the hospital. It held that the doctors had properly administered antibiotics and antivirals. It noted that the viscera examination report established the cause of death to be septicaemia and shock, which is a natural cause.
The Commission further observed that Dr Rajesh Agarwal was practising in an economically weak area where patients could not afford costly health care. Sonography could not be performed because the patient could not afford it. The Medical Council had exonerated Dr Agarwal of negligence. However, the Consumer Commission differed in its findings and held Dr Agarwal guilty of negligence because he was an allopathic doctor who had prescribed Livfirt, an ayurvedic drug.
In its order of November 14, 2025, delivered by Ritu Garodia for the Bench along with Monica Srivastava and Dr Rajender Dhar, the Commission held the hospital and Dr Rajesh Agarwal liable to pay ₹5,000 as compensation within 90 days, or along with 7 per cent interest in case of delay in payment.
The writer is a consumer activist
aniltikotekar4sme.com 