Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1271 Gua
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2022
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010051202020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/951/2020
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. REP. BY ITS
REGIONAL MANAGER, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI-7, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM.
VERSUS
SMTI. PHULPARI DEVI AND 6 ORS.
W/O- LATE JOY BAHADUR SAHNI, R/O- VILL.- ROYGARH (SHIBBARI
ROAD), P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM.
2:SRI VIKRAM KR. SAHANI
S/O- LATE JOY BAHADUR SAHNI
R/O- VILL.- ROYGARH (SHIBBARI ROAD)
P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM.
3:SRI VICKY SAHNI
S/O- LATE JOY BAHADUR SAHNI
R/O- VILL.- ROYGARH (SHIBBARI ROAD)
P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM.
4:SMT. SHOBHA KUMARI SAHNI
D/O- LATE JOY BAHADUR SAHNI
R/O- VILL.- ROYGARH (SHIBBARI ROAD)
P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM.
5:SRI VIPIN KR. SAHNI
Page No.# 2/3
S/O- LATE JOY BAHADUR SAHNI
R/O- VILL.- ROYGARH (SHIBBARI ROAD)
P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM. (RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO 5 ARE MINOR REP. BY RESPONDENT NO.
1).
6:SRI SITANDRA CH. DAS
S/O- LATE KALI KUMAR DAS
VILL.- DURGANAGAR
P.S. UDHARBOND
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788109.
7:SRI KALPATARU DAS
S/O- CHANDAN DAS
VILL.- KAYAKHAL
P.O. RAKHAL BASTI
P.S. AND DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788156
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GOSWAMI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR D MONDAL
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI
ORDER
Date : 08-04-2022
Heard Mr. R. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company/applicant.
Also heard Mr. M. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 to 5.
This is a petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 filed by the applicant/Insurance Company to condone the delay of 42 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and order dated 04.10.2019, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cachar at Silchar in MAC Case No. 515/2016.
Page No.# 3/3
The applicant has shown some grounds in the application regarding the delay of filing the appeal. However, the learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 to 5 submits that he has no objection, if the delay of 42 days is condoned. Hence, the prayer of the applicant is allowed.
It is pertinent to say here that notices upon the respondent no. 6 and 7 have not been served properly. It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 to 5 that to consider the prayer for condonation of delay, presence of respondent nos. 6 and 7 are not necessary.
Under such backdrop, considering the submission of the learned counsels for both the parties, delay of 42 days is condoned.
Registry is directed to register the connected appeal.
Accordingly, I.A stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!