The Supreme Court said that a Medical Council report alone cannot be the final say in disagreeing with the Consumer Forum's findings about medical negligence. This came up in a case where a man's son lost vision in one eye after cataract surgery, and the Consumer Forum granted compensation, but the State Commission overturned it based on the Medical Council's report. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) also upheld this decision, leading the man to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court agreed with the man, stating that the State Commission and NCDRC didn't consider expert testimony indicating the doctor's negligence. The Court rejected the idea that the Medical Council's report alone could clear the doctor of negligence. While the report could be relevant, it shouldn't be the final decision, especially when it conflicts with the Consumer Forum's findings. The Court criticized the commissions for relying solely on the Medical Council's report without thoroughly examining all the evidence. As a result, the Court set aside the decisions of the State Commission and NCDRC.