IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD v. SRI N A YUVARAJA
WP/21220/2025 · 2026-03-27
Suraj Govindaraj
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 12674 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 12674 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18992 WP No. 21220 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. 21220 OF 2025 (GM-AC)
BETWEEN:
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD NO. 432, PCA AND RD BANK BUILDING, KUVEMPU ROAD (LAWYER ROAD) K B EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE 577 101.
THROUGH ITS 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.N.A.YUVARAJA AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, S/O ASHOKA N M, RESIDING AT OLD BISLERI VILLAGE, MUDAHADADI POST, DAVANAGERE TALUK, DAVANAGERE 577.
2.
SRI SUDEEP G S AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O SHIVAMURTHI.G.C, R/AT D NO. 3992/122A 1ST FLOOR, 16TH CROSS, NEAR NUTHAN COLLEGE, ANJANEYA BADAVANE, DAVANAGERE 577.
Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18992 WP No. 21220 of 2025
3. HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O RUDRAPPA, R/AT GANDHINAGARA, DAVANAGERE 577. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.G.J.SUNKAPUR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 R-2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04-02-2025 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND GON JMFC, DAVANAGERE IN MVC.NO.330/2023 AT ANNEXURE-H ON I.A.NO.II AND III IN MVC.NO.330/2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND ANNEXURE-E 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
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18992 WP No. 21220 of 2025
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 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18992 WP No. 21220 of 2025
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 LN/List No.: 19 Sl No.:15.105