(1.) THE appellant filed a suit for recovery of damages alleging that she was operated upon for tubectomy on 14.12.1982 but she gave birth to a male child in the year 1986. She was again operated upon on 28.12.1986 at Civil Hospital, Rohtak but inspite of this, she gave birth to another male child on 22.6.1996.
(2.) THE suit was contested, inter alia, on the plea that a per International and National literature, chances of failure of tubectomy operation are not ruled out. Birth of a child by itself did not amount to negligence.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that the decisions which were cited before the lower appellate Court supported the case of the appellant as negligence had to be presumed in every case where child was born after tubectomy operation.