LAWS(MPH)-2009-11-103

STATE OF M P Vs. SHASHI

Decided On November 10, 2009
STATE OF M P Appellant
V/S
SHASHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall also, govern the disposal of FA. No. 1092/09 as in both the appeals the judgment under challenge is dated 3.2.2004 passed by II ADJ, Badwani in Civil Suit No. 4-B/03.

(2.) By the impugned judgment in a case of unsuccessful family planning operation a sum of Rs. 20,200 has been awarded as compensation. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount of compensation FA. No. 1092/09 has been filed by the respondent, while in FA. No. 264/04 validity of the impugned judgment has been challenged whereby compensation has been awarded.

(3.) Short facts of the case are that the respondent filed a suit against the appellants on 23.6.2003 for compensation of Rs. 1,05,500 alleging that the respondent is resident of Tehsil and District Badwani. It was alleged that the marriage of the respondent was solemnized in the year 1992 with one Champalal and out of the wedlock respondent was blessed with one son on 2.4.1995 and two daughters in the year 1997-98 and 1999. In the suit it was alleged that the respondent is a labourer and the respondent is not in a position to afford the luxury to maintain more children, therefore, under the scheme of State Government respondent got herself operated on 18.8.1999 in the Community Health Center, Badwani. It was alleged that respondent was operated by Dr. Ramesh Chandra Goyal who is appellant No. 3. In the suit it was further alleged that after the operation, certificate was issued by the appellants to the respondent. It was alleged that after the operation necessary instructions which were given to the respondent were followed by the respondent. It was further alleged that the respondent was again pregnant and delivered a female child on 8.5.2002 at Community Health Center, Pali District Badwani. It was alleged that respondent delivered an unwanted child because of carelessness and negligence on the part of the appellants in performing the operation. It is stated that respondent suffered loss of Rs. 25,000 and also suffered mental and physical torture. It was alleged that respondent is not in a position to maintain 4th child, therefore, compensation of Rs. 1,50,500 be awarded.