Montu Bose vs Pranita Saikia And 2 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 3178 Gua

                                                                         Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010104462019




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

                               Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2352/2019

            MONTU BOSE
            S/O- LATE BADAL BOSE, VILL.- KHELMATI, P.O. BALIPARA, P.S.
            CHARIDUAR- 784103, DIST.- SONITPUR, ASSAM.



            VERSUS

            PRANITA SAIKIA AND 2 ORS.
            W/O- ARUN CHANDRA HAZARIKA, VILL.- CHANDMARI, P.O. TEZPUR-
            784001, DIST.- SONITPUR, ASSAM.

            2:ARUN CHANDRA HAZARIKA
             S/O- BALARAM HAZARIKA
             RAIL GATE HAZARAPAR
             P.O. TEZPUR- 784001
             DIST.- SONITPUR
            ASSAM.

            3:THE REGIONAL MANAGER
             NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

             G.S. ROAD
             ULUBARI
             P.O. GUWAHATI- 781007
             DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
             ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A R AGARWALA

Advocate for the Respondent : MS. R D MOZUMDAR
                                                                      Page No.# 2/3

                                 BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

                                    ORDER

Date : 29-11-2021

Heard Mr. A. R. Agarwala, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. C. Mozumdar, learned counsel for respondent No. 3.

However, none has appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 2 though the name of Mr. R. Baruah, learned counsel, has been shown in the Cause List as appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 2.

This is an application preferred by the applicant/Insurance Company under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, praying for condonation of delay of 18 days, in preferring the connected appeal which is directed against the judgment & award, dated 19.01.2019, passed by the learned Member, MACT, Sonitpur, in MAC Case No. 79/2017.

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 on account of several deliberations made between the engaged Advocate and the applicant/Insurance Company.

Ms. Mozumdar, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, has no objection to the above prayer.

Page No.# 3/3

Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the explanation provided in the accompanying application, as indicated above; I am satisfied that the applicant/ Insurance Company was prevented by a sufficient cause in not preferring the connected MAC. Appeal within the stipulated time and accordingly, the delay of 18 days in filing the connected appeal, be condoned. It is hereby accordingly ordered.

The interlocutory application stands allowed and accordingly stands disposed of.

Registry shall register the connected appeal and list it for admission hearing in the next week by showing the name of Ms. C. Mozumdar, learned counsel, as appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3 in the Cause List.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant