Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 19 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 9283 OF 2024 (GM-AC)
BETWEEN:
THE REGIONAL MANAGER
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD
C-22, MAXIMUS
COMMERCIAL COMPLEX
L.H.H. ROAD, HAMPANAKATTE
MANGALORE 01
NOW REPRESETED BY
THE REGIONAL MANAGER
ICICI LOMBARD GENEAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD,
TH
9 FLOOR, THE ESTATE 121
DICKENSON ROAD,
M G ROAD, BENGLAURU 560 042
COMPANGY REGISTERE
U/S COMPANIES ACT 1956.
…PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. A N KRISHNA SWAMY.,ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
AND:
1. DORESWAMY
S/O THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
BELGULI VILLAGE
DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT 573 116.
2. KIRAN H D
S/O DHANAPALE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
OLD NEHURU BOREWELL
OFFICE BACKSIDE
HASSAN CITY
HASSAN 573201.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GIRISH G K., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-D DATED 14.02.24
TH
PASSED BY 4 ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AND MACT, HASSAN (SIT AT
CHANNARAYPATNA) ON IA FILED UNDER ORDER 7
RULE 11 (d) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC READ
WITH 166(3) OF IMV ACT IN MVC NO. 496/23; ALLOW
THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER
ANNEXURE -B AND HOLD THAT CLAIM PETITION AS
PER ANNEXURE-A IS NOT MAINTAINABLE.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
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
'the Act'
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [for short, ] in the
claim petition in MVC No.496/2023 on the file of the
IV Additional District and Sessions Judge,
the Tribunal
Channarayapatna [for short, ' ']. The
petitioner has filed an application under Order VII
Rule 11[d] read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 contending that the claim petition
cannot be entertained because it is filed beyond six
months from the date of accident. The Tribunal, by
the impugned order dated 14.02.2024, has rejected
the petitioner’s application.
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
The question: whether a claim petition filed
beyond six months from the date of the accident can
be entertained 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 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
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
nv
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 19 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 9283 OF 2024 (GM-AC)
BETWEEN:
THE REGIONAL MANAGER
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD
C-22, MAXIMUS
COMMERCIAL COMPLEX
L.H.H. ROAD, HAMPANAKATTE
MANGALORE 01
NOW REPRESETED BY
THE REGIONAL MANAGER
ICICI LOMBARD GENEAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD,
TH
9 FLOOR, THE ESTATE 121
DICKENSON ROAD,
M G ROAD, BENGLAURU 560 042
COMPANGY REGISTERE
U/S COMPANIES ACT 1956.
…PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. A N KRISHNA SWAMY.,ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
AND:
1. DORESWAMY
S/O THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
BELGULI VILLAGE
DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT 573 116.
2. KIRAN H D
S/O DHANAPALE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
OLD NEHURU BOREWELL
OFFICE BACKSIDE
HASSAN CITY
HASSAN 573201.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GIRISH G K., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER AS PER ANNEXURE-D DATED 14.02.24
TH
PASSED BY 4 ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AND MACT, HASSAN (SIT AT
CHANNARAYPATNA) ON IA FILED UNDER ORDER 7
RULE 11 (d) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC READ
WITH 166(3) OF IMV ACT IN MVC NO. 496/23; ALLOW
THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER
ANNEXURE -B AND HOLD THAT CLAIM PETITION AS
PER ANNEXURE-A IS NOT MAINTAINABLE.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
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
'the Act'
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [for short, ] in the
claim petition in MVC No.496/2023 on the file of the
IV Additional District and Sessions Judge,
the Tribunal
Channarayapatna [for short, ' ']. The
petitioner has filed an application under Order VII
Rule 11[d] read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 contending that the claim petition
cannot be entertained because it is filed beyond six
months from the date of accident. The Tribunal, by
the impugned order dated 14.02.2024, has rejected
the petitioner’s application.
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
The question: whether a claim petition filed
beyond six months from the date of the accident can
be entertained 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 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10179
WP No. 9283 of 2024
HC-KAR
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
nv