M/s Spring Meadows Hospital v. Harjot Ahluwalia (1998)

This case is about a child who suffered severe brain damage after a nurse gave an injection without proper caution. The Supreme Court held the hospital responsible for its staff’s mistake. It said parents who pay for treatment are also “consumers” under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Court granted compensation to the child and to the parents for mental agony.

• Consumer Protection Act, 1986: The word “consumer” is broad. Family members who receive the service and the person who pays can both be treated as consumers. Lack of privity cannot defeat a claim for deficiency in service.
• Vicarious Liability: A hospital is responsible for acts of its doctors and nurses done in the course of employment, including negligent treatment or failure to perform standard precautions.

The National Commission held the hospital liable because the resident doctor and the nurse were its employees. Compensation was awarded: ₹12.5 lakh to the child and ₹5 lakh to the parents for mental agony. On appeal, the Supreme Court agreed on the hospital’s liability and confirmed that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 applies. Parents who arrange and pay for treatment are “consumers” and can claim for deficiency in service.

1. Wide Consumer Standing: Under the CPA 1986, both the paying parent and the treated child are consumers.
2. Vicarious Liability of Hospitals: Hospitals are responsible for negligent acts of employed medical staff.
3. No Privity Shield: Absence of direct contract with the child cannot defeat a consumer claim.

The decision protects patients and families by recognizing their right to safe care and effective remedies. It encourages hospitals to maintain proper protocols, training, and equipment because they will be answerable for staff errors.

• CPA 1986 gives broad consumer standing to families.
• Hospitals are vicariously liable for staff negligence.
• Basic precautions (like sensitivity tests) are essential.
• Compensation can include mental agony of parents.

Mnemonic (SPRING): Staff error • Parents are consumers • Rule of vicarious liability • Injury after injection • No privity shield • Grant of compensation.

1. Spot the service provider (hospital) and staff action.
2. Plug CPA definitions to include parents + child.
3. Rule with vicarious liability; conclude on compensation.

Vicarious Liability

When an employer is legally responsible for the acts of employees done in the course of work.

Deficiency in Service

Any fault, imperfection, or shortcoming in the quality or manner of performance of a service.

Privity of Contract

A direct legal relationship between contracting parties. Not a bar under CPA for family claims.