SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 731

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Anish Dayal, J
Sardar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Damodar – Respondent
MAC.APP. 22/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sameer Nandwani
For the Respondents: Yet to be served

Tribunals and High Courts should not dismiss motor accident claim petitions on the ground of limitation under Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, during the pendency of related petitions before the Supreme Court.

Headnote:The case involves a challenge to an order passed by the Claims Tribunal dismissing a claim petition as barred by limitation under S. 166 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The appellant submitted that the issue of limitation regarding claim petitions is currently sub-judice before the Supreme Court in a batch of matters. The Court noted that the Supreme Court had issued directions prohibiting the dismissal of claim petitions on the ground of limitation pending the finalization of the specific issue in the lead matters. The central issue is whether a tribunal can dismiss a claim petition based on the limitation period prescribed under S. 166 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, while the interpretation of this provision is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court. The ratio decidendi of the Court is based on the directive issued by the Supreme Court in the cited SLP, which explicitly restrains tribunals and High Courts from dismissing claim petitions on the ground of limitation under S. 166 (3) while the relevant petitions are pending before the Apex Court. The proceedings in the appeal were adjourned, and notice was ordered to be issued to the respondent Insurance Company, with the matter directed to be listed alongside other batch matters in view of the ongoing proceedings before the Supreme Court.

Table of Content
1. appellate courts defer findings on limitation pending supreme court guidance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. procedural directions for issuing notice and listing of matters. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)

CM APPL.1731/2026 (Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of.

MAC.APP. 22/2026

1. This appeal assails order dated 27th September 2025 passed by Presiding Officer Presiding Officer, MACT, Patiala House Courts, Delhi, dismissing MACT No.285/2025 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. Sameer Nandwani, 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 24th 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 4th 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 10th February 2026.

5. Accordingly, on appellant taking steps, notice be issued to respondent no.3/Insurance Company.

6. There is no requirement for issuing notice to respondent nos. 1 and 2, driver and owner, at this stage.

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

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top