- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2555 WP No. 30308 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 30308 OF 2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, KUDALASANGAMESHWARA ARCADE, NO 1, OPPOSITE TO IDBI BANK, B.D.ROAD, NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND, CHITRADUGA CITY. NOW REP BY ITS MANAGER LEGAL, MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, NO 28, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 RAJASTHAN. REPTD BY ITS MANAGER (COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT 1956) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B C SHIVANNE GOWDA.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2555 WP No. 30308 of 2025 AND: 1. MAHANTHESHA S/O THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS. R/AT BORENAHALLI VILLAGE, EACHGHATTA, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 526. 2. ANANTHAKUMAR, S/O NARAYANAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT MARAGODANAHALLI VILLAGE, JODITHATTIKERE POST, KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-G DATED THE ORDER DATED 4/8/2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF I ADDITIONAL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHITRADUGA IN MVC NO 84/2025 IN AN APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN AND FURTHER TRIBUNAL ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(d) READ WITH 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE R/W SECTION 166(3) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT IN MVC NO 84/2025.THE PETITIONER PRAYS TO DISMISS THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN IN MVC NO 84/2025 AND FURTHER DISMISS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2555 WP No. 30308 of 2025 THE ABOVE CLAIM PETITION IN VIEW OF THE BARRED BY LIMITATION BY ACCEPTING THE OBJECTION FILED TO DELAY APPLICATION AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND FURTHER HELD THAT THE CLAIM PETITION FILED BY THE 1 RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-B IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BY ALLOWING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(d) READ WITH 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE R/W SECTION 166(3) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT AS PER THE ANNEXURE-E. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER This petition is by the Insurer who is called upon to answer a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [for short, 'the Act'] in the claim petition in MVC No.84/2025 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga [for short, 'the Tribunal']. If the claimant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of the delay in filing the claim petition, the petitioner has filed an application under Order VII Rule 11[d] read with Section 151 of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2555 WP No. 30308 of 2025 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and read with Section 166 (3) of the Act contending that the petition because it is filed beyond six months from the date of accident is not maintainable. The Tribunal, by the separate impugned orders dated 04.08.2025, has allowed the application filed by the claimant rejecting the application filed by the petitioner. The question: whether a belated claim petition could be entertained condoning the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is pending with the Apex Court in SLP Nos.8412-8413/2023 and similar matters in the writ petition in WP [Civil] No. 166/2024 and connected matters. It remains undisputed that the Apex Court by its interim order dated 16.12.2025 has observed that the pendency of the writ petitions/special leave petitions before it shall not come in the way of the claim petitions being adjudicated by the Tribunals but with the stipulation that judgments shall not be finalized. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2555 WP No. 30308 of 2025 This Court is of the considered view that with the afore-stipulation, this petition must be disposed of observing that the Tribunal's impugned order will be subject to the outcome in the pending matters before the Apex Court. With this arrangement, the inquiry into the merits of the claim petition will continue, but the Tribunal will refrain from pronouncing its judgment and award so that the decision on the merit of the claim petition otherwise will be subject to the Apex Court’s decision on the afore question. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA