Mustt Sarvan Bewa vs General Manager Shri Ram General ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1925 Gua

                                                                      Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010041242019




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

                                Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/726/2019

            MUSTT SARVAN BEWA
            W/O LATE KACHAA, S.K. VILL. NORTH RAIPUR PART-I, P.S. GOLAKGANJ,
            DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM.



            VERSUS

            GENERAL MANAGER SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
            LIMITED AND ANR
            SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., F-8, EPIP, RIICO INDUSTIRIAL
            AREA, SITAPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN 302022

            2:MD. EKRAMUL HOQUE
             S/O ABDUL KASHEM ALI SK
            VILL. KANURI PART-III
             P.O. BISHKHOWA
             P.S. GOLAKGANJ
             DIST. DHUBRI
            ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S BANIK

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. L R MAZUMDER
                                                                           Page No.# 2/3

                                  BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

                                       ORDER

Date : 01.06.2022

Heard Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. P. Borthakur, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1/Insurance Company .

None has appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2 though the name of the learned counsel has been shown in the Cause List as appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2.

This is an application preferred by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, praying for condonation of delay of 27 days, in preferring the connected appeal which is directed against the judgment & award, dated 28.05.2018, passed by the learned Member, MACT, Dhubri, Assam, in MAC Case No. 159/2011.

The reason for the delay in not preferring the connected MAC. appeal within the stipulated time has been explained by the applicant in the accompanying application, stating it to be due to an error of judgment on the part of the applicant as the applicant was under the bona fide belief that the period of limitation would expire on 26.09.2018 and thereby, inadvertently, a delay of 27 days in preferring the connected appeal have occurred due to the bona fide error of judgment by the applicant.

Upon consideration of the explanation provided by the applicant/Insurance Company in the accompanying application, as highlighted hereinabove; I am satisfied Page No.# 3/3

that there was no deliberate negligence or laches on the part of the applicant and the delay of 27 days in preferring the connected appeal have occurred due to the bona fide error of judgment on the part of the applicant and accordingly, delay of 27 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned in the interest of justice.

The interlocutory application stands allowed and accordingly stands disposed of.

Registry shall list the connected appeal for admission hearing in due course.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant