- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19473 WP No. 32584 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 32584 OF 2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER BHARATHI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, PRIDE QUADRA NO.30, 3RD FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU 560024. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.121, THE ESTATE, 9TH FLOOR, DICKENSON ROAD, M G ROAD, BENGALURU 560042. REPRESENTED BY MANAGER LEGAL NOTE. IN VIEW OF DEMERGER OF GENERAL INSURANCE BUSINESS OF BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED TO ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ASHOK N PATIL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UMAPATHI S/O NARAYAN NAIK, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19473 WP No. 32584 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST 2. SRINIVAS N S/O NARAYAN NAIK, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, 3. BHAGYA LAXMI D/O VENKATESH NAIK, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE ALL ARE RESIDENT OF D MADKARIPUR VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA 577541 4. BRANCH MANAGER HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD LAWYERS ROAD DAVANAGERE 577002 5. LINGA RAJU S/O LAKSHMANA NAIK MAJOR, RESIDENT OF BEVINAHALLI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK 577519. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMON ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-H DATED 21.07.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, AT CHITRADURGA ALLOWING THE IA NO.4 UNDER SECTION 5 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19473 WP No. 32584 of 2025 OF THE LIMITATION ACT AND DISMISSING THE IA NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(D) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE READ WITH SECTION 166(3) INDIAN MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, IN MVC NO.115/2023. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. In the above petition, the short question that arises for consideration is whether a claim petition filed under sub-section (3) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would be maintainable if instituted beyond a period of six months from the date of the accident. 2. It is not in dispute that the said issue is presently under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412–8413/2023. By way of an interim order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the pendency of the Special Leave Petitions shall not preclude the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal from proceeding with the adjudication of claim petitions; however, it has been expressly - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19473 WP No. 32584 of 2025 stipulated that final judgments shall not be pronounced. 3. In view of the aforesaid development, and having regard to similar interim orders passed by this Court in connected matters, it is submitted that this petition may be disposed of with appropriate directions to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to proceed with the matters, subject to the limitation imposed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. Having considered the submissions and the interim directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with the following directions: 4.1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal shall be at liberty to proceed with the adjudication of the claim petitions in all respects, including recording of evidence and hearing of arguments; 4.2. However, the Tribunal shall not pronounce or draw up the final award in the said proceedings until further orders are passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412–8413/2023. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19473 WP No. 32584 of 2025 5. It is further clarified that the ultimate outcome of the proceedings before the Tribunal shall abide by the decision to be rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions. 5.1. In the event the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that claim petitions filed beyond the period of six months from the date of the accident are maintainable, the Tribunal shall be at liberty to proceed to pronounce and draw up the final award in accordance with law; 5.2. Conversely, if it is held that such claim petitions are not maintainable, the Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders in conformity with the law so declared. 6. With the above Observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY List No.: 19