KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 11 — The High Court has awarded RM2 million in damages to the widow of Vinayak Pradhan, a senior lawyer and former director of the Asian International Arbitration Centre, for medical negligence.

Justice Akhtar Tahir ordered the government to compensate Jayshree LC Doshi RM800,000 for pain and suffering, RM700,000 in special damages and RM500,000 in aggravated damages.

According to Free Malaysia Today, Akhtar imposed aggravated damages after the radiologist showed no compassion despite being informed about the deceased’s severe burns.

"He also took a lackadaisical attitude in responding to the distress of the plaintiff and the deceased,” Akhtar said.

Vinayak, who had practised law at Skrine for more than 45 years, passed away on March 8, 2020, at the age of 72.

The first defendant, an interventional radiologist at the National Cancer Institute (IKN) in Putrajaya, was found liable for the negligence.

The suit against the second defendant, a plastic surgeon at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital, was dismissed. Both were government employees.

The court ruled that the plaintiff had proven the claim of negligence against the radiologist based on the balance of probabilities.

Akhtar also ordered the government to pay RM250,000 in costs to Jayshree, who was the executor of her late husband’s estate.

However, Jayshree was ordered to pay RM30,000 in costs for her unsuccessful suit against the government and the plastic surgeon.

The judge highlighted that the deceased was a healthy individual before the radiofrequency ablation (RFA) procedure but became bedridden and had to undergo several medical treatments.

He noted the deceased’s active life prior to the procedure, which included family vacations.

The case revealed that Vinayak developed a thymic neuroendocrine tumour and had undergone surgeries in 1998 and 2004.

On September 21, 2017, he was referred to IKN following the recurrence of the tumour.

At a multidisciplinary meeting on October 9, 2017, doctors recommended cryoablation therapy for treating the tumour near the chest.

However, the radiologist chose to perform the RFA procedure on December 12, 2017.

The plaintiff claimed that the radiologist did not inform her or the deceased of the meeting’s recommendation for cryoablation.

The judge noted that the plaintiff only learned about the recommendation from a medical report she received after Vinayak’s death.

Akhtar said the radiologist convinced the plaintiff and the deceased to agree to the RFA by downplaying the risks.

He said that if the plaintiff had known of the risks, they would have sought a second opinion.

The court found the radiologist’s decision to perform the RFA reckless and improper, questioning whether a detailed surgery plan had been prepared.

Lawyers Ambiga Sreenevasan, James Khong, and Edwin Lim represented Jayshree. Federal Counsel K Saravanan and Noorul Fhaiez Nayan acted for the doctors and the government.

The government has filed an appeal on the quantum awarded.