Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 51513 (KAR)

THE MANAGER v. SMT VEENA S

WP/35969/2025 · 2026-01-19

B M Shyam Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2564 WP No. 35969/2025 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.35969/2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO. S/5, 2ND FLOOR, MONARTH CHAMBER, OPP. INFANTRY WEDDING HALL, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE-1. NOW REP. BY THE SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY. LTD., NO.5/14, 3RD FLOOR, SV ARCADE, BILIKALLALLI MAIN ROAD, IIMB POST, BENGALURU - 560 076. REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER. COMPANY IS REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT 1956. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT VEENA S W/O. LATE MAHESH N.K., AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 2. MASTER YATHISH N.M., S/O. LATE MAHESH N.K., AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS SINCE 2ND RESPONDENT IS MINOR, WILL BE REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER SMT. VEENA. S Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2564 WP No. 35969/2025 BOTH ARE R/AT NAGARANAHALLI, HALLI MYSORE HOBLI, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573211. 3. N.C. SHIVANAND SWAMY, S/O. LATE CHANNAPPA, MAJOR, NAGARANAHALLI, HALLI MYSORE HOBLI, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573211. 4. KRISHNA, S/O. LATE NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 5. SMT. PARVATHI, W/O. KRISHNA, MAJOR. 4TH AND 5TH RESPONDENT ARE R/AT NAGARANAHALLI, HALLI MYSORE HOBLI, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 211. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. QUASH THE ORDERS ON IA NO. 1 DATED 11.08.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF XVIII ADDITIONAL. SCJ, BANGALORE IN M.V.C. NO. 64/2024 AT ANNEXURE - A. B. BE PLEASED TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OF ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTIONS TO REJECT THE APPLICATION NO.1 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT AS ANNEXURE -A IN M.V.C. NO. 64/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF XVIII - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2564 WP No. 35969/2025 ADDITIONAL SCJ, BANGALORE AND HOLD THAT THE CLAIM PETITION IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 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.64/2024 on the file of the XVIII Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal']. The claimants have filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of the delay in filing the claim petition. The Tribunal, by the impugned order dated 11.08.2025, has allowed the application filed by the claimants. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2564 WP No. 35969/2025 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. 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2564 WP No. 35969/2025 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 List No.: 3 Sl No.: 12