Gauhati High Court
New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Rajib Das And 4 Ors on 12 November, 2021
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010202202017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3315/2017
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
BUILDING 87, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, FORT, MUMBAI 400001 AND
REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI-5, REPRESENTED BY THE
CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER
VERSUS
RAJIB DAS and 4 ORS,
S/O RANJIT DAS, R/O VILL. PANIGAON, P.S. SADAR, DIST. NAGAON,
ASSAM.
2:SUSHIL LUNDIA S/O RADHA SHYAM
R/O MOKHUAPHUL BAZAR
B.R. PHUKAN ROAD
GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSAM
OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-01/BC-8133 TRUCK
3:RAJKISHOR SUKLA S/O J. SUKLA
R/O LAHARPATTY PANCHALI BAGESHOP
DIBRUGARH ASSAM DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-01/BC-8133
4:THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. NAGAON BRANCH
ASSAM INSURER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-12/F-2850 MOTORCYCLE
5:BAPAN DAS S/O RANJIT DAS
R/O VILL. PANIGAON P.S. SADAR DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-12/F-2850 MOTORCYCL
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.N MODI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R K BHATRA (R4)
Page No.# 2/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA
ORDER
Date : 12-11-2021
Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel for the applicant/Insurance
Company. However, none has appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 4
though the names of the learned counsels representing the said respondents
No. 1 & 4 are reflected in the Cause List.
Relevant Office Note indicates that notice on respondent No. 5 has been
served.
Mr. Dutta, learned senior counsel, prays for striking-off the names of
respondents No. 2 & 3 from the array of respondents on the ground that as the
connected appeal is directed against the quantum of the compensation awarded
by the learned Tribunal; the respondents No. 2 & 3 who are the owner and
driver of the offending vehicle, respectively, are not necessary parties to this
proceeding.
Prayer is allowed.
At the risk of the appellant, Registry shall strike-off the names of
respondents No. 2 & 3 from the array of the respondents.
Page No.# 3/4
This is an application preferred by the applicant under Section 173 second
proviso of the M.V. Act, 1988, read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963,
praying for condonation of delay of 78 days, in preferring the connected appeal
against the judgment, dated 04.02.2017, passed by the learned Member, MACT,
Nagaon, in M.A.C. Case No. 608/2013.
The reasons for the delay in not preferring the connected appeal within
the stipulated time have been explained in the accompanying application stating
that the delay have occurred due to the official procedure to be followed after a
legal opinion was sought from the learned Advocate in making correspondence
between the Divisional and Regional Offices of the applicant/Insurance
Company.
Upon hearing the learned senior counsel for the applicant/ Insurance
Company and on perusal of the explanation provided in the accompanying
application, as indicated above; 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 78 days in filing the connected
appeal, be condoned. It is hereby accordingly ordered.
The interlocutory application stands allowed and accordingly stands
disposed of.
Page No.# 4/4
Registry shall register the connected appeal and list it for admission
hearing after 2 weeks.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
