3 weeks ago
Consumer Commission Holds Bhatia Hospital Guilty for Delaying Newborn Discharge
A baby was born and had a health problem, so it was kept in a special baby care unit at Bhatia Hospital in Mumbai.
The doctor said the baby was healthy enough to go home.
The father had already paid the hospital more money than the bill came to.
But the hospital would not let the baby leave until an insurance company approved the payment.
The insurance company said no, and the baby had to stay for many extra hours.
The father made a complaint to a consumer court.
A higher court said the hospital was wrong and had not done its duty properly.
The court said hospitals cannot keep patients just because of insurance paperwork.
It ordered the hospital to give money back and pay compensation.
The court also said keeping a tiny baby away from its mother was callous and insensitive.
The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held Bhatia Hospital guilty of deficiency in service for delaying a newborn's discharge by over nine hours while awaiting cashless insurance approval.
The Commission set aside an earlier order by the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission that had dismissed advocate Rajesh Dharap's complaint.
The hospital was directed to refund Rs 2,000 with 6 per cent interest, pay Rs 25,000 as compensation for mental harassment, and Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs.
The Commission observed that a patient cannot be detained for want of clearance of the bill, calling the hospital staff's conduct 'callous, casual and insensitive.'
The newborn's treating paediatrician had approved discharge on February 24, 2017, and the father had deposited Rs 15,000 — more than the final bill of Rs 13,515.
- Who
- Advocate Rajesh Dharap and his two-day-old newborn twin; Bhatia Hospital; the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided over by Justice S.P. Tavade and Vijay C. Premchandani.
- What
- The State Consumer Commission held Bhatia Hospital guilty of deficiency in service for delaying the newborn's discharge over pending cashless insurance clearance and awarded compensation.
- Where
- Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, at Bhatia Hospital and the consumer commissions of Maharashtra.
- When
- The discharge delay occurred on February 24, 2017, and the Commission's order was reported on August 5, 2026.
- Why
- The hospital kept a newborn declared fit for discharge by the treating doctor away from his mother for hours while insurance formalities were pending; the Commission ruled patients cannot be detained for want of bill clearance.
Patient Rights Advocates
Hospital Procedural Perspective
Insurance clearance and discharge
Patient Rights Advocates
Hospitals cannot detain a patient, especially a newborn declared fit for discharge, merely because insurance formalities are pending; the deposit already exceeded the bill and the father undertook to pay any balance.
Hospital Procedural Perspective
Hospitals may follow procedural rules for cashless claims before completing discharge, and the South Mumbai District Commission had dismissed the complaint based on a technical interpretation of those rules.
Key facts
- Hospital
- Bhatia Hospital, Mumbai
- Complainant
- Advocate Rajesh Dharap
- Patient
- Two-day-old newborn twin admitted to NICU with hypoglycaemia
- Discharge approved
- February 24, 2017
- Delay
- Over nine hours
- Amount deposited
- Rs 15,000 (final bill Rs 13,515)
- Compensation ordered
- Rs 2,000 refund with 6% interest, Rs 25,000 for mental harassment, Rs 10,000 litigation costs
- Ruling body
- Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Quotes
Advocate Rajesh Dharap
Advocate representing the plaintiff
“This case was never about Rs 2,000. It was about the dignity of a two-day-old newborn. Despite the treating doctor's discharge advice, despite the hospital already holding more money than the outstanding bill, and despite my undertaking to pay any balance, if any, my child was kept away from his mother for several hours. The State Commission has rightly held that such conduct was callous, insensitive and amounted to deficiency in service.”
freepressjournal.in
Sources
Related news
Father wins Rs 94,000 after insurer rejected child's hospitalisation claim
Bengal clinical establishment commission chairperson's final prescription for health reform
Maharashtra Rights Panel Closes Case, Finds No Medical Negligence
Kerala consumer commission orders nursing agency to pay Rs 24,000
Insurer to pay widow Rs 50 lakh after rejecting claim
Maharashtra Commission Orders IVF Doctor to Pay Surrogacy Compensation
Mumbai Commission Revives Nine-Year-Old Complaint Over ₹30 Chakali Receipt
Study-abroad firm ordered to refund Rs 11 lakh to student
Woman wins Rs 6.3 lakh over negligent dental root canals
Citi Bank Ordered To Refund ₹12.91 Lakh Home Loan Interest
