Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5447 Gua
Judgement Date : 17 June, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010293352023
2025:GAU-AS:7980
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/802/2024
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
(A CENTRAL GOVT. UNDERTAKING) HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT
GUWAHATI, G.S. ROAD, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI- 781007, REP. BY THE
DEPUTY MANAGER, GAUHATI REGIONAL OFFICE, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI-
781007.
VERSUS
PRADIP DUTTA AND 3 ORS.
S/O SHRI SUREN DUTTA,
VILL.- ALENGMORIA GAON,
MOUZA- GURJUGONIA, P.O.- DHEKIAL, P.S.- DERGAON, DIST.- GOLAGHAT,
ASSAM, PIN- 785622.
2:MOMITA DUTTA
W/O SHRI PRADIP DUTTA
VILL.- ALENGMORIA GAON
MOUZA- GURJUGONIA
P.O.- DHEKIAL
P.S.- DERGAON
DIST.- GOLAGHAT
ASSAM
PIN- 785622.
3:PROSEN BORA
S/O LATE PADMA BORA
VILL.- SANTIPUR
MOUZA- BORPATHAER
P.O.- BILGAON
Page No.# 2/3
P.S.- BORPATHER
DIST.- GOLAGHAT
ASSAM
PIN- 785621.
4:BUDHEN BORA
S/O LATE PADMA BORA
VILL.- SANTIPUR
MOUZA- BORPATHAER
P.O.- BILGAON
P.S.- BORPATHER
DIST.- GOLAGHAT
ASSAM
PIN- 785621
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R D MOZUMDAR, MR. S P SHARMA,MS. C MOZUMDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. J K GOSWAMI (R-1), MR D J BORO(R-1),MR. J
BARMAN(R-1)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 17.06.2025
Heard Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1.
2. This interlocutory application, under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 180 days in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment and award dated 20.03.2023, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Golaghat, in MAC Case No. 57/2013.
3. Ms. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was delay in obtaining the certified copy of the judgment and award by the counsel engaged of the applicant and thereafter, legal opinion from the counsel of this Page No.# 3/3
Court was obtained, and in the process, some delay had occasioned, and that the same is not intentional, rather it is circumstantial, and that she has arguable points in the appeal, which are required to be adjudicated on merit, and as such, she has contended to allow this application.
4. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1 submits that he has no objection in the event of condoning the delay of 180 days in preferring the connected appeal by the applicant.
5. Taking note of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, and also considering the explanation so forthcoming for the delay, especially from paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the application, this Court is of the view that the delay is sufficiently explained and accordingly, the same stands condoned.
6. In terms of above this I.A. stands disposed of.
7. In view of the order passed today in I.A.(Civil) No. 802/2024, now the Registry shall proceed to register the connected second appeal and list the same before this Court as soon as practicable.
8. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1 submits that he has not been provided with a copy of the memo of appeal.
9. Ms. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to furnish a copy of the memo of appeal to Mr. Goswami by tomorrow.
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!