Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Ram Kishan Ahirwar And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CR-7082-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision : 12.11.2025 IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

Ram Kishan Ahirwar & Ors ... Respondent(s) CORAM :

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Mr. Sanjeev Kodan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nafeesh Ahmed, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 22.04.2024 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nuh whereby the application filed by the petitioner-Insurance Company for dismissing the claim petition on the ground of limitation has been dismissed. 2.

On 05.12.2024 the following order was passed : " Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the question as to whether the Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has the power to condone the delay in filing the claim petition is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ayiti Navaneetha & Ors. [Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.8412 of 2023].

Notice of motion returnable 22.05.2025.

YOGESH SHARMA 2025.11.13 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.

Chandigarh

CR-7082-2024 (O&M) Meanwhile, proceedings shall go on, however, final order be not passed."

3.

On 04.11.2025 the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case has passed the following order :

" 1. Mr. Gautam Jha, learned counsel is nominated as nodal counsel for these batch of matters.

2. This court has been informed that there are a number of petitions across the country filed on the same issue and any finding recorded by this Court would have bearing on the pending petitions. In that view of the matter, the hearing of these matters requires to be expedited.

3. Pleadings shall be completed, if not already completed, within two weeks from today, failure to do so would result in such those parties loosing their right to file pleadings.

4. It is made clear that learned counsel appearing for the parties are at liberty to file written synopsis, not exceeding five pages, within two weeks from today and each of the counsel would be permitted to address the oral arguments not exceeding half-anhour.

5. 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 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

6. Re-list these matters on 25.11.2025."

4.

In view of the above, no ground is made out to entertain the present revision petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. 12.11.2025 Yogesh Sharma ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO YOGESH SHARMA 2025.11.13 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.

Chandigarh