The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) observed that Aravind Eye Hospital treated the child in a "casual" manner even though she required constant care till she was cured considering the seriousness of her illness.
The child was one-and-a-half-year-old when she was brought to the hospital in March, 2005, as caterpillar hair had entered her left eye, but she was discharged "without confirming" if the ailment had been completely cured, a bench headed by Justice J M Malik noted.
"Considering the evidence of experts... We are of the considered opinion that seeing the seriousness of the ailment, it was necessary to keep the child under constant care in the hospital till the ailment was completely cured. But opposite party (hospital) neglected it and treated the child in a casual manner.
"We are of the considered opinion that there is deficiency in service by opposite party and negligence in proper treatment, which resulted in loss of vision in left eye of complainant," the bench said.