##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19031 WP No. 10901 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

WRIT PETITION NO. 10901 OF 2026 (GM-AC)

BETWEEN:

THE MANAGER, SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

T P HUB, 1ST FLOOR, RUKMINI TOWERS, 3/1, PLATFORM ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM,

BENGALURU - 560 020 REP. ITS MANAGER, ANANDA. M

COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT-1956.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. RAVI G. S.

Digitally signed by S/O. SULADA RANGAIAH, SHARADAVANI B

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

Location: High Court of R/O. GULEHARIVE, GULURU HOBLI, Karnataka

K PALASANDRA POST, TUMKUR - 572 118.

2. NARASIYAPPA, S/O. LATE LAKSHMAIAH, MAJOR,

R/O. MUDIGERE, BUGUDANAHALLI POST, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMKURU - 570 107.

3. CHETHAN KUMAR A. B, S/O LATE BOMMEGOWDA,

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19031 WP No. 10901 of 2026

HC-KAR

R/AT CNV NILAYA, NO. 14, WARD NO.1, NEAR WATER WELL,

ANCHE KEMPANNA DODDI, RAMANAGARA - 571 511.

4. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., TP HUB, NO.9/2, 2ND FLOOR,

MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 29.10.2025 PASSED ON IA NO. VII BY THE HONBLE VII ADDL. JUDGE AND ACJM COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU IN MVC NO. 4911/2024 AT ANNX-A AND

ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

The captioned writ petition is filed by the Insurance

Company calling in question the order dated 29.10.2025 passed by the VII Additional Judge & ACJM, Court of Small Causes and ACJM, Bengaluru in M.V.C. No.4911/2024, whereby the Tribunal has proceeded with the adjudication of the claim petition notwithstanding the contention of the petitioner that the claim petition itself is barred by

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19031 WP No. 10901 of 2026

HC-KAR

limitation, having been instituted beyond the prescribed

period of six months.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner–

Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in proceeding with the claim petition despite the admitted fact that the claim petition has been filed beyond the statutory period of six months. In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, wherein the question relating to the maintainability of claim petitions filed beyond the prescribed period and the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for

condonation of delay in such matters has been examined.

3. Having examined the judgment relied upon by the

learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is informed that the very same question, namely, whether a belated claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 can be entertained by invoking Section 5 of the

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19031 WP No. 10901 of 2026

HC-KAR

Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay beyond the statutory period, is presently under consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.8412–8413 of 2023. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that in several similar matters, Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, while taking note of the pendency of the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, have disposed of writ petitions with an observation that the pendency of the matter before the Hon'ble Apex Court shall not come in the way of the Tribunal proceeding with the adjudication of the claim petitions. However, the Tribunal has been directed to defer the pronouncement of the final judgment and award until the issue regarding maintainability of such belated claim petitions is authoritatively decided by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court.

4. In the light of the consistent view taken by the

Co-ordinate Benches of this Court and bearing in mind that the issue concerning the maintainability of claim petitions