SMT M THULASI vs B CHOWLAMMA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8450 OF 2023 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. M. THULASI,
W/O. LATE M. ESHWARAPRASAD NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS.
2. M. VAMASI KRISHNA NAIK,
S/O. LATE ESHWARAPRASAD NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS.
3. MUDE SARANYA,
D/O. LATE M. ESHWARAPRASAD NAIK,
AGE 4 YEARS.
4.
M. RATHNAMMA,
W/O. M. SHANKARA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
5. M. SHANKARA NAYAK,
S/O. M. APPA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
6. M. SUMITHA,
D/O SHANKARA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS.
7. M. UMA MAHESH NAYAK,
S/O. SHANKARA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.66,
PRAKASH LAYOUT, VARTHUR,
BENGALURU - 560 087.
PERMANENT ADDRESS:
3-88, PATRAPALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
MITTACHINTHANTHAVARI PALLI,
PUNGANUR, CHITTOOR, A.P. - 517 247.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
B. CHOWLAMMA,
AGE MAJOR,
R/AT NO. 1-80-1,
MADANAPALLI POST,
MADANAPALLI MANDAL,
CHITTOOR DISTRICT,
A.P. - 517 325.
2.
CHOLA MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
UNIT NO.14, 9TH FLOOR,
(LEVEL 6), GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX,
59TH C-CROSS, 4TH M-BLOCK,
INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 010.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED: 19.02.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.08.2023 PASSED IN MVC
NO. 4348/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C XXIV ADDITIONAL
SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-26
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.,
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This is the appeal filed under Section 173 (1) of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short "the MV Act") by
the claimants/appellants not satisfied with the
compensation awarded in the judgment and award dated
17.08.2023 in MVC No.4348/2022 on the file of XXIV
Additional Small Causes Judge & MACT & ACMM (SCCH-
26), Bengaluru (in short 'the Tribunal').
2. Parties would be referred with their ranks, as
they were before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience
and clarity.
3. The claimants being the wife, minor children,
parents and brothers of the deceased- Eshwara Prasad
Naik, have filed the claim petition before the Tribunal in
respect of the death of husband of claimant No.1 in the
road traffic accident that has taken place on 24.07.2022
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
at about 05:20 p.m. on Madanapalli Tirupathi Main Road,
Madanapalli Mandal involving motorcycle bearing
registration number AP-03/AZ-7084 and Tractor bearing
registration No.AP-03-TE-9100. Due to the impact of the
accident, the rider of the motorcycle i.e. Eshwara Prasad
Naik, the husband of claimant No.1 died on the spot.
Thus, the claimants have claimed compensation under
different heads.
4. Respondent No.2-Insurance Company appeared
through its counsel and filed objection statement wherein
respondent No.2 denied the contention taken by the
claimants in the claim petition and also taken the plea that
the Courts in Bengaluru have no territorial jurisdiction, as
the claimants are residents of Andhra Pradesh State and
the accident has taken place within the jurisdiction of
Andhra Pradesh State.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
5. After framing issues, recording evidence and
hearing arguments of both sides, the Tribunal came to the
conclusion that the claimants are entitled for
compensation of ` 30,56,760/- under following heads:
Sl. Nature of Compensation Amount
`
No
1. Loss of dependency 27,41,760/-
2. Loss of consortium 2,80,000/-
3. Loss of estate 20,000/-
4. Transportation of dead body, 15,000/-
Funeral & obsequies Expenses
Total 30,56,760/-
6. Not satisfied with the same, the claimants are
before this Court.
7. Heard arguments of both sides.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant,
Sri M.B.Chandrachooda, would submit that the Tribunal
has taken the income of deceased at ` 12,000/- which is
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
less than the notional income chart prepared by KSLSA
and hence, prayed for enhancement of the compensation.
9. Learned counsel for respondent No.2,
Sri Pradeep.B would submit that the claimants are
residents of Andhra Pradesh and they have produced
Aadhar cards to show that they are residents of Andhra
Pradesh State and not the residents of Karnataka.
However, he is not questioning the territorial jurisdiction
of the Court before this Court because respondent No.2
has already satisfied the award. Learned counsel for
respondent No.2 would further submit that the notional
income taken by the trial Court is exorbitant because the
wages of labourers differs from State to State and it is
very less in Andhra Pradesh compared to Karnataka.
According to the prevailing wages in Andhra Pradesh, the
income of the deceased is to be taken at Rs.9,000/- but
the tribunal has already taken Rs.12,000/- and hence
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
10. Having heard arguments of both sides, verifying
the appeal papers and trial Court records, the point that
arises for consideration is:
'Whether the claimants are entitled for
enhancement of the compensation?'
11. Finding is in the negative for the following :
REASONS
12. The claimants are the wife, minor children,
parents and brothers of the deceased; in all seven
claimants have filed the claim petition. In the claim
petition they have stated their address as "Varthur,
Bengaluru Rural District" and have shown their permanent
address as Patrapalli-V & post, Mittachinthanthavari Palli,
Punganur, Chittor, A.P.
13. The accident has taken place within Andhra
Pradesh State; the claimants and deceased are permanent
residents of a small village in Andhra Pradesh State.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
14. Further, in the affidavit evidence, the claimant
No.1 has stated that she is a permanent resident of
Patrapalli-V & post, Mittachinthanthavari Palli, Punganur,
Chittor, A.P and further has stated that on the date of
swearing the affidavit, she came to Bengaluru and sworn
and that she has not stated the address of Varthur,
Bengaluru as her address in her affidavit evidence.
15. No document is produced to show the income of
the deceased. Hence, the Tribunal has taken the notional
income of deceased at Rs.12,000/- and awarded the
compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
However, when the claimants and deceased are the
residents of Andhra Pradesh, the notional income fixed by
the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for the purpose of
awarding compensation under Motor Vehicles Act is to be
taken into consideration and not the notional income fixed
by KSLSA.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
16. In this regard, the Division Bench of this Court
in the case of Manager Cholamandalam M S General
Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Banda Saraswathi and Others
in MFA No.5097/2023 dealt with the issue at paragraph
No.7 and considered the notional income of deceased at
Rs.
7,000/- per month in the year 2018.
17. By placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment of
the Division Bench of this Court, the Co-ordinate Bench of
this court in a recent judgment in M/s United India
Insurance Co.Ltd vs. S Kamal Basha and Others
(MFA No.8682/2024 dated 29.07.2026) has taken the
notional income of deceased at Rs.9,000/- for the year
2022. Thus, the notional income of the deceased in the
present case ought to have been taken at Rs.9,000/- per
month but the Tribunal has already taken it at Rs.12,000/-
and awarded the compensation under the head 'loss of
dependency'. There is no appeal from the insurance
Company. On the other hand, it has already satisfied the
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58877
MFA No. 8450 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010600592023
award. Hence, there is no reason to interfere in the
aforesaid judgment on the aforesaid point.
18. Hence, this Court holds that the claimants are
not entitled for enhancement of the compensation as
prayed in the appeal. Accordingly, this Court passes the
following:
ORDER
Appeal is dismissed .
Digitally Signed By:
(GEETHA K.B.)
JUDGE
rs
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28
K B GEETHA