Indian Medical Association v V.P. Shantha (1995)

Law of Torts · Consumer Protection Act 2019

Facts.

A batch of cases raised a single question: whether medical practitioners and hospitals fell within the Consumer Protection Act at all. The medical profession argued that medicine is a profession governed by its own disciplinary machinery, not a “service” sold to a “consumer”, and that the summary procedure of the consumer fora was unsuited to complex clinical questions.

Issue.

Are medical services rendered by a doctor or hospital a “service” under the Consumer Protection Act, and is a patient a “consumer”?

Held.

Yes. The Supreme Court held that medical services rendered for consideration are a “service” within the Act. Services rendered free of charge to everybody are outside it — but where a hospital charges some patients and treats others free, even the non-paying patient is a consumer, because the service is not free as a class. A contract of personal service is excluded, but a doctor–patient relationship is a contract for services, not of service.

Why it matters.

It opened the consumer forum to every patient in India, and it is the answer to the recurring problem where a Government hospital pleads that free treatment is not a “service”.

📄 Full Law of Torts notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past exam questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · All landmark cases · All Law of Torts topics