Dr. Lakshman Balkrishna Joshi v. Trimbak Bapu Godbole

Facts

The respondent's son, aged about 20, suffered a fracture of the femur of his left leg in an accident on a sea beach and was taken to the appellant doctor's hospital. The doctor reduced the fracture without administering anaesthetic, using only a single dose of morphia, and applied excessive force with three attendants pulling the leg before putting it in plaster. The treatment resulted in shock and the patient's death.

Issues

• What is the standard of care owed by a medical practitioner to his patient?
• Was the doctor negligent in the manner of treatment?

Arguments

The plaintiff contended the doctor's treatment was negligent, using excessive force without anaesthesia and causing fatal shock. The doctor contended he had exercised the discretion available to him in choosing treatment.

Held

The Supreme Court held the doctor guilty of negligence. It laid down that a practitioner must bring to his task a reasonable degree of skill and knowledge and exercise a reasonable degree of care — neither the highest nor a very low degree, judged in the light of the circumstances of each case. The doctor has discretion in choosing treatment, relatively ampler in emergencies, but the manner in which the fracture was reduced here fell below the required standard and caused death.

Ratio decidendi

A person who holds himself out as a medical practitioner owes a duty of care in deciding whether to undertake the case, what treatment to give, and in administering it; he must exercise the reasonable skill and care of an ordinary competent practitioner of his class, and breach gives a right of action.

Significance

The leading Indian Supreme Court statement of the standard of care in professional/medical negligence, repeatedly relied upon in later medical-negligence jurisprudence.

Related