New India Assurance Company ... vs Prakhend Rajkhowa And 2 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 245 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010067822019




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1077/2019

            NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
            HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NEW INDIA ASSURANCE BUILDING
            87, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, MUMBAI AND ONE OF THE REGIONAL
            OFFICE AT ULUBARI, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI.



            VERSUS

            PRAKHEND RAJKHOWA AND 2 ORS.
            S/O- KIRTI RAJKHOWA
            R/O- AMGURI VILLAGE, P.O. AND P.S.- KAKOPOTHAR, DIST.- TINSUKIA,
            ASSAM, PIN- 786160.

            2:SMT. PANWATI DEVI
            W/O- SRI RAMLAL RAI
            R/O- PALTAN BAZAR
             R/O- CHIRAPATTI
             P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA
             DIST.- TINSUKIA
            ASSAM
             PIN- 786125. (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-23-A-3235).

            3:SRI RAMLAL RAI
             S/O- LATE DIP NARAYAN RAI
            R/O- CHIRAPATTI
             P.O.
             P.S. AND DIST.- TINSUKIA
             ASSAM
             PIN- 786125.
            (DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-23-A-3235)

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. K K BHATRA
                                                                                          Page No.# 2/3

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R C PAUL




              Linked Case :

             NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED



              VERSUS

             MR PRAKHEND RAJKHOWA AND 2 ORS



             ------------
             Advocate for :
             Advocate for : appearing for MR PRAKHEND RAJKHOWA AND 2 ORS



                                      BEFORE
                          HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

                                               ORDER

Date : 27-01-2021

Heard Ms. R. Gangawat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant. Also heard Ms. M. Nirola, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel, representing the respondent No. 1; and Ms. M. Bharati, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2 & 3.

This is an application preferred by the applicant, under the second proviso to Section 173(1) of the M.V. Act, read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with praying for condonation of delay of 61 days, in preferring the connected appeal, against the judgment & order, dated 28.09.2018, passed by the learned Member, Tinsukia, Assam, in MAC Case No. 81/2014.

The learned counsels representing the respondents submits that they have no objection if the delay of 61 days in preferring the connected appeal is condoned by the Court.

Page No.# 3/3

The reasons for delay in not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time have been explained in paragraphs No. 3 to 12 of the accompanying application stating that it was on account of the file process that was undertaken in the Divisional and Regional Offices of the applicant/Insurance Company accompanied by the legal opinion that was sought from the learned Advocate that the delay of 61 days had occurred in preferring the connected appeal.

Upon hearing the learned counsels appearing for the parties and on perusal of the explanation provided in paragraphs No. 3 to 12 of this interlocutory application; I am satisfied that the applicant was prevented by a sufficient cause in not preferring the connected MAC. Appeal within the stipulated time and accordingly, the delay of 61 days in filing the connected appeal, be condoned. It is hereby accordingly ordered.

The interlocutory application stands allowed and accordingly stands disposed of.

Registry shall register the connected appeal and list it accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant