1 2026:CGHC:22265 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 590 of 2020 Tikam Sahu, S/o. Latel Sahu, Aged About 42 Years, R/o. Village Madauda, Police Chowk - Jalbandha, Tahsil Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Yashwant @ Ashawan Verma, S/o. Shri Babulal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o. Village Madauda, Police Chowk - Jalbandha, Tahsil Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Irfan Memon, S/o. Shri Usman Memon, Aged About 25 Years, Memon Niwas, Chandani Chowk, Nehru Nagar, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondents : None appeared. (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.05.13 15:46:47 +0530 2 Judgment on Board 12.05.2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant/ claimant seeking the amount of compensation, challenging the order dated 13.02.2020 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon. 2. Mr. Swapnil Keshari, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ claimant, would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred both in law and on facts in rejecting the claim application solely on the ground that the application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was not filed within a period of six months from the date of accident i.e. 18.05.2019; therefore, the same deserves to be set aside. 3. None for the Respondents, despite service of notice. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the records minutely. 5. A careful perusal of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act would show that Section 166(3) was inserted in the statute book w.e.f. 01.09.2019, however, it was brought into force with effect from 01.04.2022, therefore, on the date of accident i.e. 18.05.2019, there was no provision for filing claim petition within six months from 3 the date of accident, as held by the learned Claims Tribunal. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 6. The constitutional validity of Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act is under challenge before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Supreme Court in the matter of ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ayiti Navaneetha & Others in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s) 8412-8413/2023 on 04.11.2025 has directed as under :- “5. It is made clear that during the pendency of these petitions, the tribunal or the High Courts shall not dismiss the claim petitions on the ground of such petitions as barred by limitation as prescribed under sub-section (3) or section 16(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.” 7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.02.2020 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for hearing and disposal in accordance with law and for passing of the award afresh within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Record be sent forthwith to the Claims Tribunal. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent as indicated herein above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok