Bombay HC Rejects Wockhardt's ₹1.23 Crore Claim Against Doctor

The Bombay High Court has dismissed an appeal by Wockhardt Hospitals Ltd. seeking over ₹1.23 crore in damages from a senior physician who resigned with only seven days' notice.

The dispute began when Dr Nitish Vyas, a Senior Consultant in Internal Medicine and Critical Care, resigned from Wockhardt's Rajkot facility in September 2023. His contract stipulated a three-month notice period, but he ceased work just seven days later.

Wockhardt Hospitals filed a summary suit claiming ₹1.44 crore in total damages, including ₹1,23,79,637 for lost business. The hospital calculated this figure by projecting the doctor's average monthly billing over his final three months.

The trial court initially dismissed the suit ex parte in March 2026 due to lack of material evidence. The hospital then appealed to the High Court, arguing that precise accounting is impossible when a key physician leaves unexpectedly.

Advocate Mohit Khanna, representing the hospital, contended that compensation was due under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act. However, the High Court rejected this argument, stating that statutory compensation requires evidence of actual losses, not hypothetical calculations.

The court pointed out that Wockhardt presented no evidence showing patients were turned away or that it made any effort to hire a replacement physician to mitigate damages.

The bench, comprising Justices Girish Kulkarni and Neela Gokhale, ruled that Wockhardt Hospitals had failed to provide concrete proof of actual financial loss caused by the doctor's departure.

Finding no merit in the appeal, the bench upheld the trial court's order and dismissed the case.

This ruling highlights the importance of providing concrete evidence of actual losses in contractual disputes.

The decision is significant for hospitals and medical professionals, as it sets a precedent for the calculation of damages in cases of unexpected resignation.

In the context of Indian contract law, the ruling emphasizes the need for parties to provide evidence of actual losses, rather than relying on hypothetical calculations.

The Bombay High Court's decision is a reminder that the courts will carefully scrutinize claims for damages, ensuring that only legitimate losses are compensated.

The case has implications for the healthcare industry, where the departure of key medical professionals can have significant consequences for hospitals and patients.

In conclusion, the Bombay High Court's dismissal of Wockhardt Hospitals' appeal serves as a reminder of the importance of providing concrete evidence of actual losses in contractual disputes.

This decision is likely to have far-reaching implications for the healthcare industry and Indian contract law, emphasizing the need for parties to provide evidence of actual losses rather than relying on hypothetical calculations.