- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19120 WP No. 30126 of 2024 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. 30126 OF 2024 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD NO.5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S.V.R ARCADE, BINALAKALLI MAIN ROAD, BELEKALLI OF B.G.ROAD, IIMB POST, BANGALORE-76, REPTD BY ITS MANAGER LEGAL &PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RAVIKUMAR T S/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT GOWDASANDRA VILLAGE, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 101 2. RAJANNA D.C. S/O CHIKKAKARDARAIH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O NO.57, RANGANATHA BADAVANE, GOPAL EXTENSIONS, SHIVMOGGA - 577 201 3. SAMEER AHMED Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19120 WP No. 30126 of 2024 S/O AMMER AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT SHARADHANAGARA, NEAR PEPER FACTORY, OLD MANDALLI, SHIVMOGGA-577201, &RESPONDENTS (R1, R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNX-E DTD. 02.03.2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT (SCCH-13) AT BENGALURU FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(D) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC, READ WITH SECTION 166(3) OF IMV ACT IN MVC NO.5468/2022. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed by the Insurance Company calling in question the order dated 02.03.2023 passed by the II Additional Small Causes Judge and MACT (SCCH-13) at Bengaluru in M.V.C. No.5468/2022, whereby the Tribunal has proceeded with the adjudication of the claim petition notwithstanding the contention of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19120 WP No. 30126 of 2024 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 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 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19120 WP No. 30126 of 2024 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 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19120 WP No. 30126 of 2024 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 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 Sl No.: 15