- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19157 WP No. 13962 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 13962 OF 2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: 1. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED INSURANCE COMPANY MYSORE TRADING CENTRE, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND, BN ROAD, MYSORE-01. NOW REP BY THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED. NO. 25/1, 2ND FLOOR, BUILDING NO.1, SHANKARANARAYANA BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER. COMPANY IS REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT 1956. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANZOOR AHMED @ SYED SHAH MOHAMMED MEHADEEN SHAH S/O. MOHAMMED HUSSAIN, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. GANESHANAGARA ROAD, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19157 WP No. 13962 of 2025 NEXT TO TIPPU SHAADI MAHAL, CHANNARAYAPATNA TOWN, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK. HASSAN DISTRICT. 2. PUTTEGOWDA, S/O. LAKKEGOWDA. GOWDAGERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHAGAT VENKATESH R., ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-SD) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-D DATED 05-03-2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHANNARAYAPATNA ON APPLICATION UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(D) R-W 151 OF CPC AND 166(3) OF MV ACT AS PER ANNEXURE-D IN MVC NO-1119-2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19157 WP No. 13962 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed by the Insurance Company calling in question the order dated 05.03.2025 passed by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Channarayapatna in M.V.C. No.1119/2024, whereby the Tribunal has proceeded with the adjudication of the claim petition notwithstanding the contention of the petitioner that the claim petition itself is barred by limitation, having been instituted beyond the prescribed period of six months. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner3 Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in proceeding with the claim petition despite the admitted fact that the claim petition has been filed beyond the statutory period of six months. In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, wherein the question relating to the maintainability of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19157 WP No. 13962 of 2025 claim petitions filed beyond the prescribed period and the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay in such matters has been examined. 3. Having examined the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is informed that the very same question, namely, whether a belated claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 can be entertained by invoking Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay beyond the statutory period, is presently under consideration before the Hon9ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.841238413 of 2023. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that in several similar matters, Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, while taking note of the pendency of the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions before the Hon9ble Supreme Court, have disposed of writ petitions with an observation that the pendency of the matter before the Hon'ble Apex Court shall not come in the way of the Tribunal proceeding with the adjudication of the claim - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19157 WP No. 13962 of 2025 petitions. However, the Tribunal has been directed to defer the pronouncement of the final judgment and award until the issue regarding maintainability of such belated claim petitions is authoritatively decided by the Hon9ble Supreme Court. 4. In the light of the consistent view taken by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court and bearing in mind that the issue concerning the maintainability of claim petitions filed beyond the period of six months is presently sub judice before the Hon9ble Apex Court, this Court deems it appropriate to adopt the same course. Accordingly, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is directed to proceed with the adjudication of the claim petition on merits. 5. However, the Tribunal shall refrain from pronouncing the final judgment and award until the Hon9ble Supreme Court renders its decision in the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions concerning the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19157 WP No. 13962 of 2025 maintainability of claim petitions filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation. With these observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE GJM List No.: 3