RANCHI, India, Aug. 18 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on July 17:

1. Heard Mr. Alok Lal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the claimants, who are respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Shekhar Siddharth, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.3 and 4.

2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 13.07.2023 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cumDistrict Judge-I, Chatra in Motor Accident Claim Case No.28 of 2021.

3. Mr. Alok Lal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the claim case was instituted by the claimants alleging therein that on 17.04.2021 at about 1:00 PM after purchasing medicine, Prince Kumar Singh was coming from Simariya market to his home and in the meantime at the place of occurrence a Hywa Truck bearing No. JH-13G4073 which was coming from opposite side in a very rash and negligent manner dashed Prince Kumar Singh as a result Prince Kumar Singh was grievously injured. It was further asserted that he was admitted in Referral Hospital, Simariya but due to seriousness, he was referred to specialized hospital. Again, he was admitted in Samford Super Specialty Hospital, Ranchi where he was admitted on 17.04.2021 by the doctor of Samford Super Specialty Hospital but Prince Kumar Singh did not regain his consciousness in spite of spending huge amount for treatment and ultimately on 25.04.2021, Prince Kumar Singh died. It was further alleged that the said deceased during treatment had been infected with corona and as such his postmortem was also not performed. On the basis of written report of informant i.e. Santosh Singh, father of deceased, Simariya P.S. Case No.56 of 2021 under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304(A) of Indian Penal Code was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. Hywa Truck bearing registration No. JH - 13G - 4073.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal has erroneously awarded a sum of Rs.18,30,146/- that is not in accordance with law. He further submits that in the claim application only claim was made of Rs.15,00,000/- however, Rs.18,30,146/- was allowed by the learned Tribunal. He further assailed the award on the ground that the postmortem was not done and in view of that it was a great lacuna in allowing the claim by the Tribunal. According to him, the age of the child was 14 years, however, monthly income has been assessed to Rs.10,000/- which is also unbelievable. On this ground, he submits that this appeal has been preferred and in view of that the award may kindly be modified.

5. Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the claimants, who are respondent Nos.1 and 2 opposes the prayer and submits that the deceased was aged about 14 years and the monthly income of the deceased was Rs.10,000/- per month, however, the learned Tribunal has decided the income of the deceased on the notional basis and for that he has applied the multiplier of the Minimum Wages Act. He submits that there is no illegality in that. On the point of postmortem, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that since in course of treatment Covid-19 was also infected with the deceased and in view of that the postmortem was not made. He submits that however the charge-sheet has been submitted which has been marked as Exhibit - 3 stating that the death has occurred due to accident.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpIGxPkMzzQ6u8i%2FwNXBKqM3heiRHQIpozdLa8Ej87TkU&caseno=MA/371/2023&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010386242023&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.