Jammu and Kashmir High Court
Mac App/58/2025 of SANT RAM AND OTHERS Vs BAJAJ ALLIANZ INSURANCE CO. LTD.TH ITS BRANCH MANAGER on 15 September 2026
28 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Mac App No. 58/2025 Sant Ram and others …. Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. Pranav Deep Singh, Advocate vice Mr. Ranjeev Dubey, Advocate V/s Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. Sunny Mahajan,
Sr. No. 28
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Mac App No. 58/2025
Sant Ram and others
…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:- Mr. Pranav Deep Singh, Advocate vice Mr. Ranjeev Dubey, Advocate
V/s
Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd.
…..Respondent(s)
Through:- Mr. Sunny Mahajan, Advocate.
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
15.09.2026
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. This appeal has been preferred against order dated 03.02.2025, passed by learned Additional MACT (Additional District Judge), Udhampur. The claim petition preferred by the appellants came to be dismissed on account of being time barred by limitation in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties admit that the accident, which resulted in the death of Rita Devi, occurred on 24.03.2022, whereas the new sub-section (3) to Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act came into effect on 01.04.2022. It is further stated that the provision prescribing limitation under the amended Section 166(3) could not have been applied to an accident which had occurred prior to its coming into force.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, it is apparent that the provision of sub-section (3) of Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, relied upon by the learned Tribunal for dismissing the claim petition, was not applicable to the case of the appellants, as the accident had occurred on 24.03.2022, i.e., prior to the coming into force of the said provision on 01.04.2022.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 03.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional MACT (Additional District Judge), Udhampur, is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Tribunal for its disposal in accordance with law.
6. Disposed of.
(Sindhu Sharma)
Judge
Jammu:
15.09.2026 Michal Sharma/PS