- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 5097 OF 2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. THE MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM M S GENERAL INS. CO. LTD., UNIT No.4, LEVEL-6, GOLDEN HEIGHT COMPLEX, 5TH 'C' CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUB-URB, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. &APPELLANT (BY SRI PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANDA SARASWATHI, W/O LATE B. SUBRAMANYAM, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 2. BANDA KRISH, S/O LATE BANDA SUBRAMANYAM, AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, 3. B. CHINNAPPA, S/O B. VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 4. B. JAYAMMA, W/O B. CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, SINCE 2ND RESPONDENT IS MINOR WILL BE REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND N/G I.E., 1ST RESPONDENT - BANDA SARASWATHI ALL ARE R/AT No.11-5, EGUVA, HARIJANA WADA, RAMASAMUDRAM MANDALAM, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517417. 5. SREENIVASALU REDDY MYLAM, S/O LATE NARAYANA REDDY, No.12-79/9, A.S. COLONY, RAMASAMUDRAM, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517417. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.R. RANGEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; R2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1; NOTICE TO R5 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.01.2023 PASSED IN MVC No.4887/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C XXII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-24 AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.30,29,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND) Heard Sri B. Pradeep, learned counsel for the appellant- Insurer Sri N.R. Rangegowda, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4-claimants. 2. The insurer has preferred the present appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 19.01.2023 passed in MVC No. 4887/2018 by the XXII Additional SCJ & ACMM & MACT, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as <the Tribunal=). For convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal. 3. The claimants (respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein) filed a claim petition seeking compensation on account of the accidental death of one Banda Subramanyam (deceased), which occurred on 02.07.2018 at about 8:20 p.m., involving a lorry bearing Reg.No.AP-03-TE-7095 and a two-wheeler bearing Reg.No.AP-16- BY-2069. It is pleaded that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month as a mason and cleaner. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 3.1 Despite service of notice, respondent No. 2 3 owner, having failed to appear, was placed ex parte. Respondent No. 1 3 Insurance Company filed its written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition, disputing the involvement of the vehicle and the validity of the driver9s licence, and contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased. 3.2 Claimant No.1 examined herself as PW-1 and marked Exs.P1 to P15. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the respondents. The Tribunal, upon consideration of the evidence on record, held that the petitioners, being the wife, son, and parents of the deceased, are entitled to compensation. The Tribunal further held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 3.3 In the absence of proof of income, the Tribunal assessed the notional income in terms of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA). The age of the deceased was taken as 25 years, a multiplier of 18 was applied, one-fourth was deducted towards personal and living expenses, and 40% was added towards future prospects to the assessed - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 monthly income. The Tribunal also awarded compensation under conventional heads. 4. Sri B. Pradeep, learned counsel for the appellant3insurer, submits that the claim petition was not maintainable before the Tribunal. He submits that the deceased and the claimants are residents of the State of Andhra Pradesh, the accident occurred within the State of Andhra Pradesh and the owner of the offending vehicle is also a resident of Andhra Pradesh. He further submits that the appellant3insurer has its office within the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is therefore contended that the claim petition is not maintainable under sub-section (2) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru. 4.1 Alternatively, learned counsel submits that the deceased was a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh. He submits that the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has issued a separate chart indicating notional income for the purpose of computation of compensation in motor accident claims. It is contended that the Tribunal committed an error in adopting the notional income as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 Authority (KSLSA), when the deceased and the claimants were residents of the State of Andhra Pradesh and the accident had also occurred within the said State. It is therefore submitted that the notional income ought to have been determined in accordance with the chart prepared by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 5. Sri N.R. Rangegowda, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4, seeks to persuade this Court by contending that the claim petition is maintainable, in view of the office of the insurer being situated within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. He further submits that the notional income adopted by the Tribunal is justified. 6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. The parties are not in dispute with regard to the liability, occurrence of the accident, involvement of the vehicle, age of the deceased, applicable multiplier, and deductions. The dispute between the parties is confined to the assessment of notional income. The Tribunal, in the absence of proof of monthly income, assessed the notional income in terms of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA). - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 7.1 If the ground of maintainability of the claim petition is to be entertained, the entire judgment and award would have to be set aside, and the claimants would be required to file a fresh claim petition before the jurisdictional Tribunal in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Such a course would cause inconvenience and hardship. 7.2 In light of the alternative submission advanced, we refrain from deciding the issue of maintainability and jurisdiction of the claim petition. Having regard to the undisputed facts that the deceased was a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh, the claimants are also residents of Andhra Pradesh, the accident occurred within the said State and the owner of the offending vehicle is likewise a resident of Andhra Pradesh, we deem it appropriate to adopt the notional income as indicated by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for the purpose of computing compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. As per the chart placed before us, the notional income for an accident of the year 2018 is Rs. 7,000/- per month. Accordingly, we assess the notional income at Rs. 7,000/- per month. 7.3 We notice that the Tribunal has not awarded compensation under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 accordance with the law laid down by the Hon9ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. decided on 31.10.2017 reported in [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. Accordingly, the compensation under the said heads are modified. 7.4 The total compensation is re-computed and tabulated as under; 7,000 + (40% of 7,000) = 9,800/- 9,800 3 (1/4th of 9,800) = 7,350/- 7,350 X 12 X 18 = 15,87,600/- Thus, the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.17,77,600/- as against compensation awarded by Tribunal at Rs.30,29,000/-. 8. Accordingly, the following; Order (i) The appeal is allowed in-part. Sl. No. Heads of Compensation Compensation by the Tribunal in Rs. Compensation by this Court in Rs 1. Loss of dependency and future prospects 28,35,000/- 15,87,600/- 2. Transportation, medical and funeral expenses. 17,000/- 15,000/- 3. Loss to the estate. 17,000/- 15,000/- 4. Loss of consortium. 1,60,000/- 1,60,000/- Total Compensation 30,29,000/- 17,77,600/- reduced Compensation 12,51,400/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19134-DB MFA No. 5097 of 2023 (iii) The judgment and award dated 19.01.2023 in MVC No.4887/2018 passed by passed by the XXII Additional SCJ & ACMM & MACT, Bengaluru, is modified. (iv) The claimants are entitled to the total compensation of Rs.17,77,600/- as against Rs. Rs.30,29,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. (v) The conditions imposed by the Tribunal with regard interest, deposit, apportionment and disbursement of the amount are maintained. (vi) The Registry is directed to transfer the amount in deposit, if any, to the Tribunal, forthwith. (vii) Draw modified decree accordingly. (viii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE MV/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1