Md Anuwar Khan vs Arpan Kr Nath And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 5558 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Md Anuwar Khan vs Arpan Kr Nath And Anr on 5 August, 2024

                                                                          Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010160092023




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

                               Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2336/2023

            MD ANUWAR KHAN
            S/O LT MD ABDU GAFUR,
            VILL.- WARD NO- 4, HAIDAR PATTY, P.O.- TEZPUR, DIST.- SONITPUR,
            ASSAM.



            VERSUS

            ARPAN KR NATH AND ANR.
            S/O TARUN CHNADRA NATH,
            VILL.- PUKHRIA, P.O.- BESSERIA, P.S.- TEZPUR, DIST.- SONITPUR, ASSAM.

            2:NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY
            TEZPUR BRANCH
             SONITPUR
            ASSAM
             PIN- 784001

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S KHAN, MS B TALUKDAR,MR. K BHATTACHARJEE

Advocate for the Respondent : MR C PHUKAN(R-2), A. N. H PHOM(R-2),MS. S
CHAKRABORTY(R-2)




             Linked Case :

            MD ANUWAR KHAN
                                                                          Page No.# 2/3

              VERSUS

             ARPAN KR NATH AND ANR (E)



             ------------
             Advocate for : MR. S KHAN
             Advocate for : appearing for ARPAN KR NATH AND ANR (E)



                                   BEFORE
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG

                                         ORDER

Date : 05-08-2024

Heard Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. I have also heard Ms. S. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party.

The learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submits that the respondent no. 1, the owner of the offending vehicle, Mr. Arpan Kr Nath, is reported to have died during the pendency of this application. He further submits that since the Insurance company is appearing, the respondent no. 1 being the owner of the offending vehicle is not a necessary party and, hence, prays for striking off the name of the respondent no. 1.

Accordingly, the name of respondent no. 1 is struck off from the array as a respondent party at the risk of the applicant.

This is an application filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 33 days in filing the connected appeal against the judgment and award dated 01.03.2023 passed by the learned MACT, Page No.# 3/3

Sonitpur in MAC case no. 31/2019. The reason for delay in filing the connected appeal has been explained in para 2, 3 and 4 of the application.

The petitioner accordingly has shown sufficient cause for not filing the connected appeal within the stipulated time. Moreover, the respondent has no objection if the delay of 33 days in filing the connected appeal is condoned.

In view of the above, the delay of 33 days in filing the connected appeal is hereby condoned.

Accordingly, this I.A. stands disposed of.

The Office is directed to register the connected appeal and list it accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant