- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19064 WP No. 26742 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. 26742 OF 2025 (GM-AC) BETWEEN: 1. THE MANAGER SHRIRM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, NO.302, 3RD FLOOR, S & S CORNER BUILDING, BENGALURU. NOW REP BY ITS MANAGER LEGAL, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD NO 5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S.V.R ARCADE, BINALAKALLI MAIN ROAD, BILEKAHALLI OF B.G.ROAD, IIMB POST, BANGALORE-76. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B C SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MASTER TEJAS @ TEJAS MATHEW S/O SHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REP BY HIS FATHER SHEKAR S/O AGED--- R/AT DANTARAMAKKI EXTENSION, JYOTHINAGARA POST-577102, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY. 2. SANTHOSH KUAMR K S/O KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT CHANDRNAGARA, KEMPANAHALLI, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY-577 102 3. THE MANAGER, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19064 WP No. 26742 of 2025 IFFCO-TOKIYO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD BRINDAVAN, GROUND FLOOR, P6(D), 1ST STAGE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, TUMAKUR-BENGALURU ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. 4. DINESH K.A. S/O ANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/O KURUBARAHALLI VILLAGE, MARALE POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK 577 101. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE 'H' THE ORDER DATED ON 20/7/2024 THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHIKKAMAGALLURU IN MVC NO.53/2024 IN IA NO.1/2024 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FILED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT AND FURTHER TRIBUNAL ERRED IN REJECTING THE IA NO.III/2024 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 IN MVC NO.53/2024 AND ETC. THIS WRIT 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19064 WP No. 26742 of 2025 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 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 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19064 WP No. 26742 of 2025 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. 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 PRS / List No.: 19 Sl No.: 0