IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 5141 OF 2025 (GM-AC)

BETWEEN:

1. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.69, 2ND FLOOR, JP AND DEVI JAMBAKESHAVAR, ARCHED MILLERS ROAD, VASANTHNAGAR, BANGALORE-560052.

REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER.

COMPANY IS REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT 1956 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADEEP B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SUMA W/O. MANISHEKAR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.15, 8^TH CROSS, 3^RD LEFT LANE, SHANTHI LAYOUT, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, DOORVANINAGAR, Digitally signed by SHWETHA BANGALORE NORTH, RAGHAVEND RA BANGALORE – 560016 Location: HIGH COURT OF

2. PURUSHOTHAM.B., KARNATAKA S/O BEERAPPA K C MAJOR R/AT NO. 12

7^TH CROSS, AKSHAY NAGARA

2^ND BLOCK KOWDENAHALLI VILLAGE RAMAMURTHYNAGAR POST BANGALORE 560016 …RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENT NO.2 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-D DATED 21-2-2024 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDL. JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER MACT, BENGALURU ON APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT AS PER ANNEXURE-B IN MVC NO.7511/2023 AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1. In the above petition, the short question that arises for consideration is whether a claim petition filed under sub-section (3) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would be maintainable if instituted beyond a period of six months from the date of the accident.

2. It is not in dispute that the said issue is presently under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412–8413/2023. By way of an interim order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the pendency of the Special Leave Petitions shall not preclude the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal from proceeding with the adjudication of claim petitions; however, it has been expressly stipulated that final judgments shall not be pronounced.

3. In view of the aforesaid development, and having regard to similar interim orders passed by this Court in connected matters, it is submitted that this petition may be disposed of with appropriate directions to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to proceed with the matters, subject to the limitation imposed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

4. Having considered the submissions and the interim directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with the following directions:

4.1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal shall be at liberty to proceed with the adjudication of the claim petitions in all respects, including recording of evidence and hearing of arguments;

4.2. However, the Tribunal shall not pronounce or draw up the final award in the said proceedings until further orders are passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412–8413/2023.

5. It is further clarified that the ultimate outcome of the proceedings before the Tribunal shall abide by the decision to be rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions.

5.1. In the event the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that claim petitions filed beyond the period of six months from the date of the accident are maintainable, the Tribunal shall be at liberty to proceed to pronounce and draw up the final award in accordance with law;

5.2. Conversely, if it is held that such claim petitions are not maintainable, the Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders in conformity with the law so declared.

6. With the above Observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed Sd/-

(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

JUDGE PRS List No.: 19 Sl No.: 0