Gauhati High Court
Sri Jaman Singh Brahma vs M/S Bajaj Allianz General ... on 7 April, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010225502019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3090/2019
SRI JAMAN SINGH BRAHMA
S/O- LATE ARJUN BRAHMA, R/O- H/NO. 10, BISHNU RABHA PATH,
JANAKPUR, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI- 781028, DIST.- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM.
VERSUS
M/S BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED AND 8 ORS
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, GUWAHATI BRANCH, ULUBARI,
GUWAHATI, DIST.- KAMRUP(M), PIN- 781007, ASSAM.
2:SRI SANJIB KR. BORO
S/O- MAHENDRA BORO
VILL.- SILBARI
P.O. BAMAKHATA
DIST.- BAKSA
BTAD
PIN- 781327. (DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-01-AM-7850).
3:MUSSTT. ASHMA BEGUM @ KHATOON
W/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
ASSAM.
4:MD. AHAMAD ALI
S/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
Page No.# 2/3
ASSAM.
5:MD. NUR MAHAMMAD ALI
S/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
ASSAM.
6:MD. ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE
S/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
ASSAM.
7:MD. AMARAT ALI
S/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
ASSAM.
8:MISS REJIA KHATOON
D/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
ASSAM.
9:MISS FARIDA KHATOON
D/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI
R/O- VILL.- MADHUPUR
P.S. DALGAON
DIST.- DARRANG
PIN- 784178
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P P BORTHAKUR
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R GOSWAMI (R1)
Page No.# 3/3
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
ORDER
Date-07.04.2021
Heard Mr. P.P. Borthakur, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. R.
Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 and Ms. IVY Hussain, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2.
This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation
of 348 days of delay.
The impugned judgment and order was passed on 31.08.2018 and after delay of 348
days, the applicant has filed an appeal and prayed for condonation of delay.
The applicant submits that he did not have any knowledge about the impugned
judgment as because of his lawyer did not inform about it. According to the applicant, he
came to know about the impugned judgment in the 3 rd week of May, 2019, after he had
received the letter from the Insurance Company.
It is a settled principle of law that while dealing with the condonation of delay petition.
The Courts are not required to adopt a pedantic approach. The applicant is not going to get
any relief by filing the appeal after the expiry of period of limitation. In fact he runs a risk of
not getting what he wanted. Above all these, this Court is of the opinion that the delay should
be condoned where there is any possibility of injustice being done to the applicant. Therefore,
I have decided to agree with the petitioner that he has shown "sufficient cause" for delaying
in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the delay is condoned.
The interlocutory application stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
