Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10851 (KAR)

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD v. SRI Y SHASHIKUMAR

WP/20276/2025 · 2026-03-27

Suraj Govindaraj

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18979 WP No. 20276 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 20276 OF 2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD COMPANY IS REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956. BRANCH OFFICE, V.P. EXTENSION MAIN ROAD, OPP SBI BANK, CHITRADURGA THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER, SRI. SHANTHI TOWERS, 5TH FLOOR, NO.141, 3RD MAIN, EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT, KASTURI NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 043 REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI Y SHASHIKUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O YALLAPPA, RESIDING AT HALEKALLAHALLI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK. CHITRADURGA DISTRICT- 577 501. 2. P.R. HANUMANTHA REDDY, MAJOR BY AGE S/O RAMAREDDY, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18979 WP No. 20276 of 2025 RESIDING AT KARIKERE VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT- 571501, OWNER OF THE CAR BEARING NO.KA-16-M-6323. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.G.V.VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29-03-2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-IV. AT CHITRADURGA IN MVC.NO.85/2025 AT ANNEXURE-H ON APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT AT ANNEXURE-F AND APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 (D) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC AT ANNEXURE-F 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18979 WP No. 20276 of 2025 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 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18979 WP No. 20276 of 2025 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 LN List No.: 19 Sl No.: 15.97