Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs Smti. Archana Rani Chanda And 4 Ors on 12 May, 2021
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010024032020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/625/2020
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED AND 5 ORS
HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT BIJULEE BHAWAN, PALTAN BAZAR,
GUWAHATI- 781001.
2: THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD.
BIJULEE BHAWAN
PALTAN BAZAR
GUWAHATI- 781001.
3: THE SENIOR MANAGER
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD.
NUTUNPARA
HAILAKANDI TOWN
P.O.
P.S. AND DIST.- HAILAKANDI.
4: THE DEPUTY MANAGER
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD.
NUTUNPARA
HAILAKANDI TOWN
P.O.
P.S. AND DIST.- HAILAKANDI.
5: THE ASSTT. GENERAL MANAGER
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
HAILAKANDI ELECTRICAL DIVISION
NUTUNPARA
HAILAKANDI TOWN
P.O.
P.S. AND DIST.- HAILAKANDI
6: THE ASSTT. GENERAL MANAGER (LAW)
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD.
Page No.# 2/5
BIJULEE BHAWAN
PALTAN BAZAR
GUWAHATI- 781001. ( ALL THE APPLICANTS REP. BY THE CHIEF GENERAL
MANAGER (HUMAN RESOURCES AND ADMINISTRATION (HRA)
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD.
(APDCL)
BIJULEE BHAWAN
PALTANBAZAR
GUWAHATI- 781001.
VERSUS
SMTI. ARCHANA RANI CHANDA AND 4 ORS
W/O- LATE BINAY CHANDA, R/O- MOHANPUR PT.-III, P.O. MOHANPUR, P.S.
ALGAPUR, DIST.- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM.
2:BISWAJIT CHANDA
S/O- LATE BINAY CHANDA
R/O- MOHANPUR PT.-III
P.O. MOHANPUR
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM.
3:BISHAL CHANDA
S/O- LATE BINAY CHANDA
R/O- MOHANPUR PT.-III
P.O. MOHANPUR
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM.
4:BIKRAMJIT CHANDA
S/O- LATE BINAY CHANDA
R/O- MOHANPUR PT.-III
P.O. MOHANPUR
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM.
5:SMTI. CHAYA RANI CHANDA
M/O- LATE BINAY CHANDA
R/O- MOHANPUR PT.-III
P.O. MOHANPUR
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM. (OPP. PARTIES NO. 2
3 AND 4 BEING MINORS ARE REP. BY THEIR MOTHER/NATURAL
Page No.# 3/5
GUARDIAN I.E. OPP. PARTY NO. 1)
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B D DAS
Advocate for the Respondent :
Linked Case :
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED AND 5 ORS
VERSUS
SMTI. ARCHANA RANI CHANDA AND 4 ORS
------------
Advocate for :
Advocate for : appearing for SMTI. ARCHANA RANI CHANDA AND 4 ORS
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 12.05.2021
Heard Mr. D. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the applicants.
The learned counsel for the applicants have referred to the affidavit filed on
20.04.2021 to show that notice was served on the opposite parties through dasti mode, but
none appears on call for the opposite parties.
By filing this application under Rule 3A of Order XLI CPC, the applicants are seeking
condonation of delay of 557 days beyond the period of limitation in filing the connected
appeal.
The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the judgment and decree
Page No.# 4/5
that is impugned in the connected appeal was passed on 11.04.2018. On 07.05.2018, the
certified copies of the judgment and decree were procured and forwarded to the Headquarter
of the applicant no.1. On 14.05.2018, the applicants had sent the document to their then
learned standing counsel and in this connection the learned counsel for the applicants has
relied on the peon-book showing receipt of the documents by the earlier standing counsel. By
referring to Annexure-4 of this application, it is projected that on 14.12.2018, the officer of
the applicants had written a letter to their learned standing counsel seeking explanation for
their lapses in not filing the appeal, which had financial implication, which was allegedly not
responded to. However, in the meanwhile on or about 13.11.2019, the applicants were served
with a notice of proceedings of Money Execution Case No.6/2019, whereby the decree was
put to execution. It is submitted that thereafter, the documents were re-constructed and
certified copies were sent to the present standing counsel and the connected appeal was filed
on 01.02.2020 and in the process, the delay of 557 days had occurred.
it is noticed that the applicants have been able to demonstrate that they had taken
timely steps to get an appeal filed by entrusting the documents to their then standing counsel
and that the officer of the applicants had pursued the matter till 14.12.2018, but no record
has been annexed to show that even thereafter, the officials had pursued the matter further.
It is seen that within a reasonable on receipt of notice of execution proceeding, the
connected appeal was filed, as such, the Court is inclined to hold that as the applicants have
been able to demonstrate that they have taken steps on time, but because of the lapses on
part of their learned standing counsel, which is shown from record, the inadvertent delay had
occasioned.
The applicant is a public sector enterprise. Accordingly, follow the ratio laid down in
the case of State of Nagaland vs Lipok Ao, (2005) 3 SCC 752 , the Court is inclined to hold
that the applicants have been able to show good and sufficient cause of not being able to file
the connected appeal on time, as such, the delay of 557 days beyond the period of limitation
in filing the connected appeal stands condoned. However, on payment of cost as discussed
below.
However, having note that although way back in 14.12.2018 the officers of the
applicants had knowledge of default, if any, committed by their then standing counsel, yet the
applicants had failed to pursue the matter despite having a legal cell, as such, there was lack
Page No.# 5/5
of vigilance on part of the applicants to take timely action. However, the offices of the
applicants had remained casual in pursuing the matter although they were aware about the
decree and its financial implication. The Court also takes note of the fact that because of
inordinate delay in filing the connected appeal, the opposite parties have been deprived of
monitory compensation awarded on the death of their predecessor in interest by way of
electrocution. Therefore, in view of above, it is deemed appropriate that the applicants,
jointly and severally, be directed to pay a cost for delay which is assessed at Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees thirty thousand only). It would be open to the applicants to recover the same from
the concerned officials, who is found guilty of the delay and laches. The aforesaid cost shall
be deposited before the Registry of this Court for onward payment to the opposite parties.
Registry shall now register the connected appeal and list the same in the Admission
column as per the Covid-19 protocol in force.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
