National Insurance Company Ltd vs Pompi Roy And 5 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3106 Gua

                                                                   Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010051452021




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

                          Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/758/2021

         NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
         REGISTERED HEAD OFFICE AT 3, MIDDLETON STREET, CALCUTTA-
         700071, REP. BY THE A.O., NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., GAUHATI
         REGIONAL OFFICE, BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI- 781005.



         VERSUS

         POMPI ROY AND 5 ORS.
         W/O- LATE BAPPA ROY.

         2:VIKY ROY
          S/O- LATE BAPPA ROY.

         3:AKASH ROY
          S/O- LATE BAPPA ROY.

         4:BIKRAM ROY
          S/O- LATE BAPPA ROY. ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF RONGPUR KARATIGRAM
          P.O. RONGPUR
          P.S. SILCHAR
          DIST.- CACHAR
         ASSAM
          PIN- 788009. (OPPOSITE PARTY NO. 2
          3 AND 4 ARE REP. BY OPPOSITE PARTY NO. 1).

         5:M/S. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.

          CLUB ROAD
          CAPITAL TRAVELS BUILDING
          P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR
          DIST.- CACHAR
          ASSAM
                                                                            Page No.# 2/4

              PIN- 788001.

              6:L. MONOJIT SINGH
               S/O- SRI L. IBUNGTON SINGH
               R/O- VILL.- LOWAIRPOA
              ATHAIRBASTI
               P.O. AND P.S. BAZARICHERRA
               DIST.- KARIMGANJ
              ASSAM
               PIN- 788727

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. R D MOZUMDAR

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R MAJUMDAR (R-5)




                                    BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                         ORDER

Date : 22-08-2022 Heard Ms. R. D. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. M. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1, 2, 3 & 4 and Mr. M. K. Nath, learned counsel appears for the respondent No. 5.

Office note dated 11.08.2022 reflects that service on respondent No. 6 is completed. However, none appears on behalf of the respondent No. 6 when the matter is called up.

This Interlocutory Application has been filed praying for condonation of delay of 230 days beyond the period of limitation in filing the statutory appeal. The appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Award dated 24.04.2019 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cachar, Silchar in MAC Case No. 94/2016. By the said Judgment, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cachar, Silchar allowed the claim filed by the respondents No. 1, 2, 3 & 4 and awarded an amount of Rs.23,38,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh and Thirty Eight Thousand only).

Page No.# 3/4

Being aggrieved, the appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company as according to them the award is made contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corportation & Anr, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi.

It is submitted that the applicant upon receipt of the judgment sought for legal opinion of the counsel who represented the Insurance Company before the Tribunal and the same was received on 08.05.2019. The certified copy although applied for on 03.05.2019, the same was received on 14.05.2019. Subsequently the file was prepared in the Divisional Office, Silchar on 21.05.2019 and forwarded to the Gauhati Regional Office. Thereafter, by the letter dated 21.05.2019, a copy of the Driving licence of the driver, namely, the respondent No. 6 herein was sought for verification of the same from the Office of DTO Ukhrul, Manipur. The report of the investigator was received on 27.05.2019. Thereafter, subsequently the filing of the appeal got delayed due to the agitation relating to Citizenship Amendment Bill and Citizenship Amendment Act that prevailed in the State of Assam during the later months of 2019. Subsequently, further delay occurred because of the COVID pandemic because of which offices of the applicant were closed. Thereafter, upon further opinion of the counsel representing the applicant in the High Court was sought for on 11.08.2020 and which was received on 13.08.2020. Thereafter upon receipt of approval from the competent authority the matter was sent to the learned counsel for preparation of the appeal. The applicant also refers to the order dated 23.03.2020 passed in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3/2020 whereby the Apex Court ordered that the period of limitation in all

cases shall stand extended w.e.f. 15 th March, 2020 till further orders. The appeal was filed on 12.03.2021 upon making statutory deposit. In the process there was a delay of 230 days beyond the period of limitation as prescribed under the statute.

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that because of the Page No.# 4/4

grounds urged in the application seeking condonation of delay, this Court is pleased to pass appropriate order condoning the delay that has occurred while filing the statutory appeal.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents do not object to the prayer for the condonation of delay that has occurred in filing the appeal.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and upon due perusal of the pleadings on record, this Court finds the grounds urged seeking condonation of the delay can be considered to be sufficient cause for the delay that had occurred.

Accordingly, following the principles laid down by the Apex Court in N. Balakrishnan -Vs- M. Krishnamurthy reported in (1998) 7 SCC 123, the delay of 230 days is condoned.

The Interlocutory Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of.

The Registry is directed to register the accompanying appeal and list it before the Court.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant