Case Name: Sunil Kumar vs. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd.
Petition Type: Special Leave Petition (Civil) – Diary No. 25252/2026, IA No. 157243/2026.
Court: Supreme Court of India.
Date of Hearing: 26-05-2026; Order dated 27-05-2026.
Reference Judgment Challenged: High Court of Kerala judgment and order dated 06-01-2026 in MACA No.130/2022.
Parties Involved
Petitioner: Sunil Kumar (totally disabled, represented by his wife).
Respondent: IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd.
Petitioner’s Counsel: Mr. Sugam Agrawal, Adv.; Mr. A. Karthik, AOR; Ms. Smrithi Suresh, AOR; Ms. Veera Mahuli, Adv.; Ms. Nanditha S, Adv.
Respondent’s Counsel: Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR.
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih.
Issues / Allegations / Violations
Petition challenges the impugned judgment and order dated 06-01-2026 passed by the High Court of Kerala in MACA No.130/2022 concerning the dispute between Sunil Kumar and IFFCO Tokio.
Findings & Observations
The Supreme Court condoned the delay in filing the petition.
The Court permitted Dasti service and directed that service steps be completed within one week.
The Court issued a notice to be returned by 03-08-2026.
Penalties / Settlements / Directions
Delay in filing is condoned; no monetary penalty imposed.
Notice to be returned on 03-08-2026.
Dasti service allowed; service steps to be taken within one week.
Respondent’s counsel, Mr. Gopal Singh, is requested to appear or be apprised of the order.
Petitioner must serve a copy of the petition to respondent’s counsel immediately.
Respondent is required to file a counter‑affidavit and reply to any interlocutory applications before the next listing date.
Corrective Actions & Future Obligations
Respondent to file counter‑affidavit and any replies before the next court date.
Petitioner to ensure service of the petition copy to respondent’s counsel without delay.
Both parties to comply with the procedural timelines set by the Court.
Final Ruling & Enforcement
The Supreme Court’s order condones the filing delay and sets procedural deadlines for service, notice return, and filing of counter‑affidavit, which are enforceable by the Court.
