United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Md. Mainul Haque And 4 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2725 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010059382017




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

                         Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/4283/2017

         UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
         HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE and HEAD OFFICE AT 24 WHITES ROAD,
         CHENNAI AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI.



         VERSUS

         MD. MAINUL HAQUE and 4 ORS,
         S/O LAE JABED ALI, R/O VILL. CHAMATA, P.O. PACHIM CHAMATA, P.S.
         BELSOR, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN 781304

         2:BIPUL KUMAR BAISHYA

          S/O LATE NARAYAN BAISHYA
          R/O VILL. BADESILA
          P.S. HELASA PIN 781368
          DIST. BARPETA
          ASSAM.

         3:PULIN BAISHYA
          S/O LATE NARAYAN BAISHYA
          R/O VILL. BADESILA
          P.S. HELASA
          PIN 781368
          DIST. BARPETA
         ASSAM.

         4:REGIONAL MANAGER

          ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
          ULUBARI
          G.S. ROAD
          GUWAHATI-7
                                                                         Page No.# 2/3


            5:MD. WAHEDUR RAHMAN

             S/O MD. SAIFUDDIN AHMED
             R/O VILL. CHAMATA
             P.S. BELSOR
             DIST. NALBARI
             ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR.R GOSWAMI

Advocate for the Respondent : MD. A AHMED (R4)




                                     BEFORE
                         HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

                                        ORDER

Date : 08.11.2021

Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. P.K. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1, Mr. N.D. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 and Mr. D. Roy, learned counsel for the opposite party no.4.

Office note dated 22.01.2019 indicates that notice on respondent no.2 has also been served.

Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant prays for striking out the name of respondent no.5, contending that as the connected MAC Appeal has been filed in respect of the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned tribunal, the respondent no.5, who is the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle is not a necessary party. As prayed for, the name of the respondent no.5 shall stand deleted from the list of respondents at the risk of the applicant.

As all the parties are now represented, this application under Section 5 of Page No.# 3/3

the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 7 days in filing the connected MAC Appeal, which is directed against the judgment and award dated 17.07.2017 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati in MAC Case No.1960/07 (904/07) is taken up for consideration.

The reason for delay of 7 days in preferring the connected appeal has been explained to be on account of correspondence made between the regional office and the learned advocate for filing the connected appeal.

Upon considering the explanation given by the applicant and upon hearing the learned counsel for the contesting parties, this Court is inclined to accept the same as good and sufficient cause which has prevented the applicant from preferring the connected MAC Appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, the delay of 7 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal is hereby condoned for the interest of justice.

I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant