$~41

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ MAC.APP. 21/2026

SUBHAM .....Appellant

Through: Mr. Som Nath Prashar & Mr. Ritik

Singh, Advs.

versus

RAJEEV KUMAR TYAGI & ORS. .....Respondents

Through: Ms. Vijay Laxmi, Adv. for R-3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 12.01.2026

CM APPL. 1729/2026 (delay

1. This application seeks condonation of delay of 255 days in filing the

appeal.

2. Issue notice.

3. Counsel for respondent no.3 accepts notice who shall file response

before the next date of hearing, with copy to the opposite counsel.

CM APPL.1730/2026 (Exemption

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of.

MAC.APP. 21/2026

1. This appeal assails order dated 23^rd January 2026 passed by Presiding Officer Presiding Officer, MACT, East, Karkardooma Courts,

Delhi, dismissing MACT No. 231/2023 of the claimants on the ground of limitation, basis the provision under Section 166 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’).

2. Mr. Prashar, Advocate appearing for appellants, states that in a batch of petitions, with lead petition being MAC APP. 270/2024 Yogesh Kumar & Ors. v. ASI Vedpal & Ors. this issue has been agitated by various claimants, and is listed before this Court on 24^th February 2026.

3. He further informs that in some petitions before the Supreme Court, this issue has further been agitated through Special Leave Petitions (‘SLP’ and draws attention of this Court to order passed by the Supreme Court in ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Ayiti Navaneetha & Ors. SLP 8412-8413/2023 dated 4^th November 2025, where the Supreme Court has stated as under:

“2. This Court has been informed that there are number of petitions across the country filed on the same issue, and any finding recorded by this Court would have bearing on the pending petitions. In that view of the matter, the hearing of these matters requires to be expedited.

3. Pleadings shall be completed, if not already completed, within two weeks from today, failure to do so would result in such those parties losing their right to file pleadings.

4. It is made clear that learned counsel appearing for the parties are at liberty to file written synopsis, not exceeding five pages, within two weeks from today and each of the counsel would be permitted to address the oral arguments not exceeding half-an-hour.

5. It is made clear that during the pendency of these petitions, the tribunal or the High Courts shall not dismiss the claim petitions on the ground of such petitions as barred by limitation as prescribed under sub-Section (3) or Section 16(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.”

4. It is informed that the SLP is now listed before the Supreme Court on

10^th February 2026. 5. Issue notice.

6. Counsel for respondent no.3/Insurance Company accepts notice.

7. There is no requirement for issuing notice to respondent nos. 1 and 2 at this stage.

8. List this petition along with batch matters on 24^th February 2026.

9. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

ANISH DAYAL, J JANUARY 12, 2026/sm/bp