Gauhati High Court
Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. ... vs Hitesh Das And 5 Ors on 17 November, 2021
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010136082020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1635/2020
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT RAMON HOUSE,
H.T. PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY RECLAMATION, MUMBAI- 400020 AND
ITS GUWAHATI BRANCH OFFICE AT ADITYAM BUILDING, 6TH FLOOR,
LACHIT NAGAR, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM- 781007.
VERSUS
HITESH DAS AND 5 ORS.
S/O- LATE HARMOHAN DAS, R/O- VILL.- MANASPUR, WARD NO. 10, P.S.
BARPETA ROAD, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781315.
2:BIPLAB PRATIM DAS
S/O- HITESH DAS
R/O- VILL.- MANASPUR
WARD NO. 10
P.S. BARPETA ROAD
DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN- 781315.
3:MISS DRISTIREKHA DAS
D/O- HITESH DAS
R/O- VILL.- MANASPUR
WARD NO. 10
P.S. BARPETA ROAD
DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN- 781315.
4:SMTI. KANAN BALA OJAH
W/O- LATE KANAK CH. OJAH
Page No.# 2/4
R/O- VILL.- MANASPUR
WARD NO. 10
P.S. BARPETA ROAD
DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN- 781315.
5:GUNAJIT NATH
S/O- LATE JOGENDRA NATH
R/O- VILL.- GALIAHATI
SRIKARMAR PATH
METUAKUCHI
BARPETA
P.S. AND DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN- 781314.
6:ABDUL REJJAK
S/O- LATE ATOWAR RAHMAN
R/O- VILL.- JOGIRPAM
P.S. BARPETA
DIST.- BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN- 781316
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR M H AHMED
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA
ORDER
Date : 17.11.2021
Heard Ms. P. Borthakur, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard
Mr. M. H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 and
Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.5 & 6.
Page No.# 3/4
This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,
1963 read with proviso to Section 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988, for
condonation of delay of 39 days in filing the connected MAC appeal, which
appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 23.09.2019,
passed by the learned Member, MACT, Barpeta, in MAC Case No.46/2019.
The reason for delay of 39 days in filing the connected MAC appeal
have been stated to be on account of the communication made between
the office of the Insurance Company located at Guwahati and Kolkata
respectively.
Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 and
Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 submits
that they have no objection, if the delay of 39 days in filing the connected
MAC appeal is condoned by this Court.
Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of
the explanation provided in the accompanying application, indicated
hereinabove and that the delay 39 days in filing the connected MAC
appeal has been on account of various communication made between the
office of the Insurance Company located at Guwahati and Kolkata
respectively, I am of the view that the applicant was prevented by a
sufficient cause in not preferring the connected appeal within the
stipulated period. Accordingly, the delay of 39 days in filing the connected
MAC appeal is hereby condoned, in the interest of justice.
The I.A accordingly, stands allowed and disposed of.
The connected MAC appeal shall now be registered and list for
Admission hearing by showing the names of Mr. M. H. Ahmed and Mr. S.
Page No.# 4/4
Islam, as the learned counsels representing opposite party Nos.1 to 4 and
5 and 6 respectively in the Cause-list.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
