Himachal High Court Rules 12-Year Limitation Applies to Execution Petitions by Insurance Companies under Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act

The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, in Datta Ram & Others v. United India Insurance Company Limited, CMPMO No. 622 of 2023, decided on 09 September 2025, has delivered a significant judgment on the applicability of limitation to execution petitions filed under Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The petition was argued on behalf of the petitioners by Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, Advocate, while Dr. Lalit Kumar Sharma, Advocate represented the respondent–Insurance Company.

Case Background

The case arose out of an award dated 30.10.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Sirmaur, in favour of one Man Dass. In appeal (FAO No. 247 of 1997), the High Court on 27.05.2005 modified the award, directing the United India Insurance Company to first satisfy the compensation and thereafter recover the amount from the vehicle owners (the present petitioners) by filing execution proceedings before the MACT without instituting a separate civil suit.

Pursuant to this liberty, the Insurance Company filed Execution Petition No. 89-Exe/10 of 2017 on 16.11.2017 seeking recovery of the amount it had paid to the claimants. The learned Tribunal allowed the execution on 03.06.2023, holding that no limitation applied to execution under Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

High Court’s Findings

Allowing the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel set aside the Tribunal’s order and held as follows:

• Although Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act authorises recovery of compensation as arrears of land revenue and enables execution without a separate suit, the absence of an express limitation in the Act does not dispense with the general law of limitation.
• Under the Limitation Act, 1963, the period for execution of a decree or order is twelve years from the date the right to apply accrues.
• In the present case, the limitation commenced from 27.05.2005, when the High Court decided the FAO and reserved the Insurance Company’s right to recover. The execution petition filed on 16.11.2017 was therefore beyond the prescribed twelve-year period.
• The Tribunal’s reliance on Section 174 to hold that no limitation applied was erroneous. Statutory execution provisions in special enactments cannot be interpreted to nullify the limitation prescribed for execution of decrees or orders.

Significance

The judgment underscores that Insurance Companies must exercise diligence in recovering compensation amounts paid under “pay and recover” orders. Even when special statutes like the Motor Vehicles Act are silent on limitation for execution, the general limitation of twelve years continues to govern such proceedings.

This ruling provides much-needed clarity and will guide Motor Accident Claims Tribunals across the State in dealing with delayed execution petitions filed by insurers.