Page No.# 1/3 vs Numal Das And 3 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2827 Gua

                                                                      Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010223262014




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

                            Case No. : MC/1231/2014

         MISS PAPARI BORAH and ANR,
         D/O LATE PUNYA PD. BORA, R/O VILL. NABAPUR, BISWANATH CHARIALI,
         DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM, PIN 784176

         2: SOURABH JYOTI BORAH

          S/O LATE PUNYA BORA
          R/O VILL. NABAPUR
          BISWANAT CHARIALI
          DIST. SONITPUR
          ASSAM
          PIN 78417

         VERSUS

         NUMAL DAS and 3 ORS,
         S/O LATE NABIN CH. DAS, VILL. and P.O. PANIBHARAI, P.S. BISWANATH
         CHARIALI, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN- OWNER OF THE BUS AS
         12C/2519

         2:BRANCH MANAGER

         NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
         TEZPUR BRANCH
         POLICY NO. 200201/31/08/6300001703 VALID UP TO 09.08.2009 INSURER OF
         THE 709 BUS
         AS 12C/2519

         3:BRANCH MANAGER

         UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
         TEZPUR BRANCH
         POLICY NO. 130782/31/08/02/00002779 VALID UP TO 16.02.2010 INSURER OF
         THE MARUTI CAR AS 12C/247
                                                                        Page No.# 2/3


Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR.S R RAJBONGSHI

Advocate for the Respondent : MS.P BORTHAKURR-4




                                     BEFORE
                         HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

                                         ORDER

Date : 11.11.2021

Heard Mr. D.K. Nath, learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. S. Roy, learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 and Mr. S.K. Behara, learned counsel for the opposite party no.4.

Respondent no.2 has been struck off at the risk of the appellant by order dated 21.07.2017.

Mr. Nath, learned counsel for the applicant, by referring to proceedings of the Lawazima Court dated 11.01.2017 submits that the respondent no.1, in the meanwhile expired and according to him, there is no necessity to substitute the legal heir of the respondent no.1 in this proceeding.

As prayed for, the name of respondent no.1 stands deleted from the list of respondents at the risk of the applicant.

This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 81 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal, which is directed against the judgment and award dated 30.08.2013 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Biswanath Chariali, Sonitpur in MAC Case No.122/2010.

The reason for delay of 81 days in preferring the connected appeal has Page No.# 3/3

been stated to be on account of the ill health of the applicant no.1 as she was suffering from back pain and had to undergo medical treatment.

The learned counsel appearing for the opposite party has no objection if the delay of 81 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal is condoned.

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 had prevented the applicant from preferring the connected MAC Appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, the delay of 81 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal is hereby condoned for the interest of justice.

The connected MAC Appeal shall now be registered and list it for admission hearing by showing the name of Ms. S. Roy, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 and Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 in the cause list.

I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant