send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Principle: res ipsa loquitur i.e. the thing speaks for itself.
Facts: Seema got herself operated for the removal of her uterus in the defendant’s hospital, as there was diagnosed to be a cyst in one of her ovaries. Due the negligence of the surgeon, who performed the operation, abdominal pack was left in her abdomen. The same was removed by a second surgery.
Surgeon cannot be held responsible because it is merely a human error.
Surgeon can be held responsible but Seema will have to prove in the court of law that the surgeon was grossly negligent.
Surgeon will be responsible and Seema need not to prove surgeon’s negligence because presence of abdominal pack in her abdomen is sufficient proof therefor.
None of the above
The principle given is not self-explanatory and requires legal knowledge to be applied. But going by the understanding of the principle Option "3" would be the correct answer as leaving the abdominal pack insidecannot be justified in any way by a surgeon.
By: SANAT DATT BHARDWAJ ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses