Madhya Pradesh High Court
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd vs Suresh Prajapat on 5 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7509
1 MP-7184-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 5 th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. PETITION No. 7184 of 2025
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Versus
SURESH PRAJAPAT AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kunal Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner / Insurance Company.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the Insurance Company under Article
227 of the Constitution of India, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this
Court for quashing of the order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Dewas (M.P.), whereby the delay occurred in filing the claim
petition in terms of Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was
condoned.
2. Short facts of the case are that the accident occurred on 08.05.2022
resulting in grievous injuries to the claimant Suresh. After recovering from the
injuries, the claimant returned to his place of posting at Nashik, Maharashtra,
where he was deployed as personnel of the Indian Army. As no leave was
sanctioned, he could neither come nor contact his counsel. Consequently, the
claim petition could be filed only on 31.01.2023, i.e. after delay of eight months
and twenty-three days.
3. The Tribunal, while considering the application for condonation of delay
i.e. I.A. No.01 of 2023, condoned the delay by applying the provisions of Section
5 of the Limitation Act vide the impugned order dated 07.01.2025. Being
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 24-03-2026
10:13:03
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7509
2 MP-7184-2025
aggrieved by the same, the present petition has been filed by the Insurance
Company.
3.1 It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
provisions of sub-Section (3) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act are
mandatory in nature and thus, the claim petition ought to have been filed within
six months from the date of occurrence of the accident. It is further submitted that
the language of sub-Section (3) clearly provides that no application for
compensation shall be entertained unless it is filed within six months from the
date of occurrence of the accident.
3.2 It is submitted that sub-Section (3) was inserted by the legislature in
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act of
2019 with effect from 01.04.2022.
3.3 He submits that the plain and simple language of the newly added sub-
Section (3) is mandatory in nature and that no discretion is left with the Tribunal
for condoning the delay. He further submits that as the accident occurred on
08.05.2022, the period of six months expired on 08.11.2022, whereas the claim
petition was filed on 31.01.2023, resulting in delay of more than two months. It is
contended that there is no provision in the Motor Vehicles Act for condonation of
delay and the language does not provide any legislative intent to apply the
provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Thus, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eyes of law.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission.
5. The issue regarding limitation in terms of Section 166(3) of the Motor
Vehicles Act is under consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (C)
No.9152/2023, in which the Hon’ble Apex Court has passed the following order :
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 24-03-2026
10:13:03
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7509
3 MP-7184-2025
“It is made clear that during the pendency of these petitions, the
tribunal or the High Courts shall not dismiss the claim petitions
on the ground of such petitions as barred by limitation as
prescribed under sub-Section (3) or Section 16(3) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.”
6. In view of the above, in the considered view of this Court, as the matter
is presently under consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court, the issue of
limitation cannot be decided by this court or even the tribunal finally. As such, the
present petition is disposed of with direction to the Claims Tribunal to continue
with the proceedings of the case. However, no final award shall be passed in the
matter till the issue of limitation is decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
aforesaid SLP. The question of limitation shall remain open and will be subject to
final decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforementioned SLP.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the present Misc. Petition is disposed of.
However, the parties are at liberty to approach this court by filing appropriate
application before this Court, if the need so arises.
Certified copy as per rules.
(PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Anushree
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 24-03-2026
10:13:03
