The Manager Vs P v Lakshmidevi — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

The Manager Vs P v Lakshmidevi — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed with directions: the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal may continue adjudication (evidence and arguments) but shall not pronounce or draw up the final award until further orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412-8413/2023; the outcome is to abide by the Supreme Court's decision, with conditional directions depending on whether such Section 166(3) claims filed beyond six months are held maintainable. The prayer to quash the orders dated 25-06-2025 was not granted as such.

Issue for consideration

Whether a claim petition filed under sub-section (3) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is maintainable if instituted beyond a period of six months from the date of the accident.

Court's answer

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is at liberty to proceed with the adjudication of the claim petitions in all respects, including recording of evidence and hearing of arguments.

Ratio / Principle

The Tribunal shall not pronounce or draw up the final award until further orders are passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412-8413/2023.

Key takeaways

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.ratio¶41
If the Hon'ble Supreme Court holds that claim petitions filed beyond six months from the date of the accident are maintainable, the Tribunal may proceed to pronounce and draw up the final award in accordance with law; conversely, if held not maintainable, the Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders in conformity with the law so declared.ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Suraj Govindaraj J, oral order, 27-03-2026) disposed of WP No. 32732 of 2025 (GM-AC), in which IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited sought quashing of the orders dated 25-06-2025 passed on IA No.11 by the Ist Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga in M.V.C. No. 244/2024, raising the question whether a claim petition under Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is maintainable when instituted beyond six months from the accident. Since that question is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 8412-8413/2023, where an interim order lets Tribunals adjudicate but bars pronouncement of final judgments, this court directed the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to proceed with recording of evidence and hearing of arguments, but not to pronounce or draw up the final award until further Supreme Court orders; the outcome is to abide by the Supreme Court's decision, with conditional directions if such delayed claims are found maintainable or otherwise. Respondent No. 4 had been deleted vide order dated 8.12.2025.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19483 WP No. 32732 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

WRIT PETITION NO. 32732 OF 2025 (GM-AC)

BETWEEN:

THE MANAGER IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED 1ST FLOOR, SHASHIKIRANA BUILDING, SHANKAR MATTA ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA- 577 201. NOW REP. BY IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED. TP HUB, SRI. SHANTHI TOWERS, 5TH FLOOR, NO.141, 3RD MAIN, EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT, KASTURI NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 043. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP., ADVOCATE)

AND:

P V LAKSHMIDEVI

W/O. LATE MALLIKARJUNA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

M. BHAGYALAKSHMI, D/O. LATE MALLIKARJUNA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS.

M. PRADEEP, S/O. LATE MALLIKARJUNA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS.

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:19483 WP No. 32732 of 2025

HC-KAR

ALL ARE C/O C. RAGHAVENDRA CHAKRAVATHI, JALI LINGAPPA LAYOUT, NEAR AMRUTHA AYURVEDI COLLEGE, CHITRADURGA.-577 501.

BEERE THIRUMALESU, S/O. SUBRAMANYAM, MAJOR, R/O. MALYAVANTHAM VILLAGE, BATHALAPALLI MANDAL, SRI. SATHYASAI DIST. A.P. STATE - 515661.

…RESPONDENTS

(R4 IS D/W VIDE ORDER DATED 8.12.2025)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 25-06-2025 PASSED ON IA NO-11 BY THE COURT OF IST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHITRADURGA IN M.V.C. NO. 244/2024 AT ANNEXURE-A 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

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.

It is not in dispute that the said issue is presently under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:19483 WP No. 32732 of 2025

HC-KAR

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 stipulated that final judgments shall not be pronounced.

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.

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 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19483 WP No. 32732 of 2025

HC-KAR

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.

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.

With the above Observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed .

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

LN/List No.: 19 Sl No.: 15.202