Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6806
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tara Vitasta Ganju, J
MOHD. ASIF – Appellant
Versus
RAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS – Respondent
MAC.APP. 539/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Pankaj Gupta
For the Respondents: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi
Court acknowledges discretion in condoning delays in filing claims under existing statute provisions.
Headnote:The appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 challenges the Impugned Award that dismissed a Claim Petition as non-maintainable due to delay. The court recognizes discretion for condonation of delay under Section 166(4) of the MV Act and admits notice. The judgment references related ongoing cases in the Supreme Court.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discretion exists within statute for condoning delay in claim filings. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court schedules notice issuance and future motions. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
O R D E R
% 26.08.2025 CM APPL. 52994/2025 [Exemption from filing certified copies]
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2. The Application stands disposed of.
MAC.APP. 539/2025
3. The present Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act , 1988 [hereinafter referred to as “MV Act”] seeking to challenge an Award dated 05.08.2025 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, MACT, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Award”]. By the Impugned Award, the Claim Petition, which was filed by the Appellant/Claimant was beyond 6 months from the date of accident, was held to be non-maintainable, and hence, dismissed by the learned Tribunal.
4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that although the provisions of Section 166(3) of the MV Act provides that an Application shall not be entertained by the learned Tribunal after 6 months, the provisions of Section 166(4) of the MV Act as read with Rule 17 of Annexure 13 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 do give the Court a discretion for condonation of delay in filing the Interim Accident Report or a Detailed Accident Report (DAR).
5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submits that this issue is also a subject matter of consideration in a batch of cases before the Supreme Court in W.P.(C) 166/2024 captioned Bhagirathi Dash v. Union of India and the matters are next coming up for hearing on 15.07.2025.
6. Issue Notice.
6.1 Learned Counsel for Respondent No.3/Insurance Company accepts Notice.
6.2 On steps being taken, let Notice be issued to the Respondent Nos.1 and 2via all modes. An affidavit of service be filed within two weeks.
7. The Registry is directed to place on record the digital copy of the Trial Court Record duly paginated and book-marked in accordance with the rules of the High Court.
8. The parties shall file their respective written synopsis, not exceeding three pages each, at least three days before the next date of hearing, along with the compilation of judgments, if any, they wish to rely upon.
8.1 All judgments sought to be relied upon by the learned Counsel for the parties shall be filed with an index which also sets out the relevant paragraph numbers and the proposition of law that it sets forth.
9. List before the concerned Registrar for completion of service on
22.09.2025.
10. List before the Court along with MAC. APP. 354/2025 captioned Smt. Saroj Devi and Ors. v. United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors.
on 10.12.2025.
