Karnataka High Court
The Authorized Officer vs Irayya on 23 January, 2026
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:539
WP No. 201324 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO.201324 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
HDFC ERGO GEN. INS. CO. LTD.,
REGD. AND CORPORATE OFFICE,
1ST FLOOR, 165-166 BACKBAY RECLAMATION,
H.T.PAREKH MAG, CHURCHGATE,
MUMBAI-400020.
(NOW REPRESENTED BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
HDFC ERGO GIC LTD., ASHOK NAGAR,
BANGALORE)
(RANK OF THE PARTY BEFORE THE MACT RESP.NO.2)
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 1. IRAYYA S/O GURULINGAYYA MATHAPATI,
KARNATAKA AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRIL.,
R/O MANAGULI, TQ. B.BAGEWADI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
(RANK OF THE PARTY BEFORE MACT
PETITIONER.NO.1)
2. IMTIYAZ @ IMATEHAJ,
S/O CHANDASAB ASANGI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O AT PO: GOLASANGI,
TQ. B.BAGEWADI,
DIST.VIJAYAPURA-586101.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:539
WP No. 201324 of 2025
HC-KAR
(RANK OF THE PARTY BEFORE MACT RESP.NO.1)
...RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS IS D/W)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE AN APPROPRIATED WRIT, MORE SO IN THE NATURE OF
CERTIORARI AND GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS I) QUASH
THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2024 PASSED BY THE II ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT VII AT VIJAYAPURA IN
I.A.NO.I FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SEC.5 OF
LIMITATION ACT WHICH WAS ALLOWED AND I.A.NO.II FILED
BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY/RESP.NO.2 UNDER ORDER VII
RULE 11 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC AND SEC.166(3) OF M.V.
(AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019 WHICH WAS DISMISSED IN MVC
NO.306/2024, THE COPY OF COMMON ORDER, WHICH IS AT
ANNEXURE-D
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-Insurance Company.
2. Notice to respondents who are the claimant and owner of the offending vehicle respectively is dispensed for the reason that no adverse order is passed against the respondents as this Court is inclined to remit -3- NC: 2026:KHC-K:539 WP No. 201324 of 2025 HC-KAR the matter to II Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT- VII, Vijayapura (for short, 'the Tribunal'), in MVC No.306/2024.
3. The petitioner-Insurance Company has called in question the order dated 23.11.2024 passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.306/2024, wherein the Tribunal dismissed I.A.No.II filed by the petitioner-Insurance Company seeking rejection of the claim petition filed by respondent-claimant on the ground that the claim petition is not filed within six months from the date of occurrence of the accident and there is a delay of 35 days in filing the claim petition. Without adverting to the merits of the matter, it is seen that in view of the claim petition having been filed with a delay, the petitioner-Insurance Company filed an application for rejection of the claim petition under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of CPC and Section 166(3) of MV (Amendment Act) 2019, on the ground that the claim petition was barred by the law of limitation in view of the amended Motor Vehicles Act. -4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:539 WP No. 201324 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. Upon objections being filed, the Tribunal allowed the application filed by the claimant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act condoning delay and rejected the application filed by the Insurance Company under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of CPC and Section 166(3) of MV (Amendment Act) 2019, which is called in question by the petitioner-Insurance Company in this writ petition.
5. There are several matters from different Courts across the country which have approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court, being aggrieved by the rejection of the application and by the delay being condoned by the claims Tribunal, thereby permitting the continuation of the claim petition. In Writ Petition (Civil) No.166/2024 in the case of Bhagirathi Dash vs. Union of India and Another which is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court involving the question of limitation prescribed by the amended Motor Vehicles Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 16.12.2025, passed the following order: -5-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:539 WP No. 201324 of 2025 HC-KAR "The pendency of these matters would also not come in the way of claim petitions being adjudicated by the Tribunals, except finalising the judgments.
Let the matter be listed on 10.02.2026 at 02.00 p.m."
6. This being the state of affairs, the Hon'ble Apex Court has infact held that the claim petitions could proceed except finalising the judgments. Therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties and prudence demands that in view of several pendency of matters, the claim petitions before the respective Courts shall proceed further except finalising the judgments in each of the matters.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE NJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1 CT:SI