The Manager Vs Thejas N

THE MANAGER IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SHANTHI TOWERS, NO.141, 5^TH FLOOR NGEF LAYOUT, KASTURI NAGAR BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560 043 REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER NARENDRAN S. (COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT-1956)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THEJAS N. S/O. NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT NO.E-45, CHUDASANDRA NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL ANEKAL TALUK, HUSKUR BENGALURU-560 099

¶15

G. SRINIVASA RAO S/O. NOT KNOWN MAJOR R/AT NO.481, BEGUR KOPPA MAIN ROAD NEXT TO WATER TANK VADDARAPALYA

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:32944 WP No. 19801 of 2026

HC-KAR

MYLASANDRA

BENGALURU-560 068

…RESPONDENTS

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 01-06-2026 PASSED ON IA NO. I COURT OF II ADDL. JUDGE AND ACJM COURT OF SMALL CAUSES BENGALURU IN M.V.C. NO.6707/2025 AT ANNEXUREA AND BE PLEASED TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OF ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTIONS TO REJECT THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 UNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT DATED ON 16-09-2025 AT ANNEXURE-C IN M.V.C.NO.6707/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF II ADDL. JUDGE AND ACJM COURT OF SMALL CAUSES BENGALURU AND HOLD THAT THE CLAIM PETITION IS NOT MAINTAINABLE.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

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.

¶26

It is not in dispute that the said issue is presently under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412–

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:32944 WP No. 19801 of 2026

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

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 stipulated that final judgments shall not be pronounced.

¶30

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.

¶31

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:

¶32

4.1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal shall be at liberty to proceed with the adjudication of the claim petitions in all respects, including

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:32944 WP No. 19801 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

recording of evidence and hearing of arguments;

¶37

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.

¶38

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.

¶39

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;

¶40

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.

¶41