IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 39810 OF 2025 (GM-AC)

BETWEEN:

THE BRANCH MANAGER M/S HDFC ERGO GENERAL INS. CO. LIMITED, MAHARAJA COMPLEX, OPP. SUB-URB BUS STAND, NAZARBAD, BANGALORE NILGIRI ROAD, MYSORE - 570010 REP BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER LEGAL /

AUTHORISED SIGNATORY GROUND FLOOR, ACR TOWER 32, RESIDENCY ROAD, Digitally signed by OPPOSITE TO SBI BANK VANAMALA ASHOK NAGAR N BANGALORE - 560025 Location:

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D VIJAYA KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MR. EMMANUEL D SOUZA S/O VINCENT D SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, STORE MANAGER IN APOLLO PHARMACY R/AT INJALEGERE, PULIYERI VILLAGE, SIDDAPUR, VIRAJEPT TALUK, S.KODAGU, 2. SRI DEVAIAH N B S/O LATE BOPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT KAVADI VILLAGE, AMMATHI HOBLI, VIRJPET S. KODAGU DRIVER OF CAR NO. KA-12-MA-6986

3. SMT. ROOPAVATHI W/O SRI DEVAIAH N B AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT KAVADI VILLAGE AND POST AMMATHI S KODAGU OWNER OF CAR NO. KA-12-MA-6986 …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-G AND H DATED. 13.08.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO.64/2024, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T AT VIRAJPET, ON IA NO. I FILED BY THE CLAIMANT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 106 DAYS IN FILING THE CLAIM PETITION AS PER ANNEXURE-G, AND DISMISSING IA NO.IL FIELD BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY FILED UNDER SEC. 166(3) OF AMENDED M.V ACT. AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND TO ALLOW THE IA NO.II, AND DISMISS THE CLAIM PETITION ON THE GROUND OF THE PETITION IS BARRED U/SEC. 166(3)

OF AMENDED M.V. ACT.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

This petition is by the Insurer who is called upon to answer a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [for short, 'the Act'] in the claim petition in MVC No.64/2024 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Virajpet [for short, 'the Tribunal']. If the claimant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of the delay in filing the claim petition, the petitioner has filed an application under Section 166[3] of the Act read with Section 151 of CPC contending that the claim petition is not maintainable because it is filed beyond six months from the date of accident. The Tribunal, by the impugned orders dated 13.08.2025, has allowed the application filed by the claimant rejecting the application filed by the petitioner.

The question: whether a belated claim petition could be entertained condoning the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is pending with the Apex Court in SLP Nos.8412-8413/2023 and similar matters in the writ petition in WP [Civil] No. 166/2024 and connected matters. It remains undisputed that the Apex Court by its interim order dated 16.12.2025 has observed that the pendency of the writ petitions/special leave petitions before it shall not come in the way of the claim petitions being adjudicated by the Tribunals but with the stipulation that judgments shall not be finalized.

This Court is of the considered view that with the afore-stipulation, this petition must be disposed of observing that the Tribunal's impugned order will be subject to the outcome in the pending matters before the Apex Court. With this arrangement, the inquiry into the merits of the claim petition will continue, but the Tribunal will refrain from pronouncing its judgment and award so that the decision on the merit of the claim petition otherwise will be subject to the Apex Court’s decision on the afore question.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

(B M SHYAM PRASAD)

JUDGE RB