Anjan Thapa vs Md. Nazmi And 2 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3540 Gua

                                                                   Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010075672022




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

                                Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1248/2022

            ANJAN THAPA
            S/O KHIM BAHADUR THAPA,
            RESIDENT OF DEZDA, PO TANGAVAELI, PS RUPA, DIST WEST KAMENG,
            ARUNACHAL PRADESH.



            VERSUS

            MD. NAZMI AND 2 ORS.
            C/O JOGENDRA GARAGE, PO AND PS BASISTHA, GUWAHATI, KAMRUPM
            ASSAM

            2:KAMI TAMANG
             S/O M.B TAMANG

            RESIDENT OF DEZDA
            PO TANGAVAELLI
            PS DEZDA
            RUPA
            DIST WEST KAMENG
            ARUNACHAL PRADESH


            3:NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

             BELTOLA BRANCH
             DIST KAMRUP M ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : A N HUSSAIN

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R GOSWAMI (R-3)
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4




         Linked Case : MAC.App./4775/2022 (Filing Number)

         ANJAN THAPA



         VERSUS

         MD. NAZMI AND 2 ORS. E



         ------------
         Advocate for : A N HUSSAIN
         Advocate for : appearing for MD. NAZMI AND 2 ORS. E



                               BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                      ORDER

Date : 14.09.2022 Heard Mr. S. banik, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. M. Saikia, learned counsel for respondent No.3.

2. Vide order dated 29.04.2022, respondents No.1 and 2 have already been struck-off.

3. This Interlocutory Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 122 days that had occurred in preferring the accompanying appeal under Section 173 of M.V. Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Order dated 23.09.2019 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur, Tezpur dismissing the MAC Case No. 135/2016 (I).

4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that Page No.# 3/4

because of the injuries sustained in the accident the claimant had sustained grievous multiple injuries on his person including amputation of his left leg, but inspite of all the injuries sustained, the Tribunal did not take into account the relevant issues and the evidences adduced and consequently dismissed the claim petition preferred by the applicant.

5. The applicant has urged the following grounds in support of her prayer for condonation of delay:-

"4. That the claimant is a poor person and following the amputation of his left leg, it was increasingly difficult for the claimant to maintain his livelihood. As such, it was not financially possible for the claimant to come to Guwahati for filing an appeal. However, the Counsel for the claimant in the Learned Tribunal opted to help the claimant and met the expenses for filing an appeal in the Hon'ble High Court. furthermore, during the period of Pandemic, it was not possible for the claimant to come to Guwahati to prefer the appeal."

6. The respondent No.3 i.e. the New India Assurance Company although represented by a counsel, has not filed any objection, opposing the prayer for condonation of delay and also does not object to the prayer for condonation of delay.

7. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard. Grounds urged and the pleadings have been duly perused.

8. Upon due consideration of the submissions as well as the grounds urged, this Court is of the view that the grounds urged can be considered to be sufficient explanation of the delay that has occurred in filing the accompanying appeal. The Page No.# 4/4

explanation put forth for the delay that has occurred does not reveal any mala fides nor can it be seen as a dilatory strategy. On the grounds urged in the I.A., this Court finds that the delay that had occurred in filing the accompanying appeal can be condoned. Relying upon the principle of law laid down in N. Balakrishnan -Vs- M. Krishnamurthy reported in (1998) 7 SCC 123, the delay of 122 days in filing the accompanying appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 23.09.2019 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur, Tezpur in MAC Case No. 135/2016 (I) is hereby condoned.

9. Interlocutory Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of.

10. Registry is directed to number the accompanying appeal and list it before the Court after 2 (two) weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant