- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10227 WP No. 17479 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 17479 OF 2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, NO.302, 1ST FLOOR, NO. 85/2, M.M.S. COMPLEX, OPP. NANDI PETROL BUNK, P.B. ROAD, DAVANAGERE. NOW REP. BY THE SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY. LTD., NO.5/14, 3RD FLOOR, S V ARCADE, BILIKALLALLI MAIN ROAD, IIMB POST, BENGALURU - 560 076. REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.PRADEEP., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. ERAMMA C/O. ANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.1846, 3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, NEAR MODERN SCHOOL, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10227 WP No. 17479 of 2025 VIDYANAGAR, DAVANAGERE-577001 2. JARAR AHMED @ SYED JARAR AHMED, S/O. YUSUF SAAB. S. AGED ABUT 62 YEARS R/AT 1ST MAIN, 13TH CROSS, AJAD NAGAR, DAVANAGERE-577001 3. VINAYAK.N S/O. HEMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.73, JAVALAGHATTA VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577001 …RESPONDENTS (R3 IS SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-F DATED 28- 01-2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., DAVANAGERE ON IA FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(D) OF CPC R/W SECTION 166(3) (AMENDMENT ACT 2019) OF MV ACT IN MVC NO.692/2023 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10227 WP No. 17479 of 2025 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.692/2023 on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Davanagere [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 Order VII Rule 11[d] of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 166[3] of the Act contending that the claim petition is not maintainable because it is filed beyond six months from the date of accident. The Tribunal, by the separate impugned orders dated 28.01.2025, has allowed the application filed by the claimants rejecting the application filed by the petitioner. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10227 WP No. 17479 of 2025 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10227 WP No. 17479 of 2025 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 NV List No.: 4 Sl No.: 64