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. 24243 OF 2025 (GM-AC)

BETWEEN:

THE REGIONAL MANAGER TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD., 3RD FLOOR J P AND DEVI JAMBUKESHWARA ARCADE, NO. 69, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560052 REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. HEGDE SUBRAYA VENKATARAMAN., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed 1. HANUMANTHARAJU.S by SHWETHA S/O SIDDAGANGAIAH RAGHAVENDRA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, Location: HIGH COURT OF R/O NO.224, T BEGUR, KARNATAKA NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL – 562123

2. THE LIGHT PLACE, NO.4, AIRPORT ROAD, DOMLUR, BENGALURU- 560071 REP. BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER.

3. ASHWATHNARAYANA.C S/O SIDDAGANAIAGH.H MAJOR IN AGE PLOT NO. 65, 8TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS, NEAR LUMINARG SCHOOL, VIDYAMANYA NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH – 560091.

…RESPONDENTS (R1 AND R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE -E DATED 20.12.2024 PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU ON IA -1 UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE CLAIM PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 166 OF THE MV ACT 1988 IN MVC NO. 8325/2023 AND HOLD THAT CLAIM PETITION AS PER ANNEXURE-A IS NOT MAINTAINABLE 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 List No.: 19 Sl No.:15.115