Indian Bank and 2 Ors v. Gajen Das and 6 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010016642024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/412/2024o INDIANoBANKoANDo2oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoCHAIRMANoANDoMANAGINGoDIRECTOR,oHEADoOFFICE,o2o NETAJIoSUBHASHoROAD,oKOLKATA-o700001,oWESToBENGAL 2:oTHEoGENERALoMANAGER(HR) oINDIANoBANK oHEADoOFFICEo2oNETAJIoSUBHASHoROAD oKOLKATA-o700001 oWESToBENGAL 3:oTHEoDEPUTYoGENERALoMANAGER oINDIANoBANK oZONALoOFFICE oGoSoROAD oOPPoBORAoSERVICEoSTATION oGUWAHATI-o781007 oASSAo VERSUSo GAJENoDASoANDo6oORSo S/O-oKESHABoDAS,oR/O-oNORTHoGUWAHATI,oRAJADUWAR,oDIST-oKAMRUP, ASSAM 2:AKHILoBORO oS/O-oSRIoGANGADHARoBORO oR/O-oHoNO.o16oODALBAKRA oLALGANESH oGHY-o34 oDIST-oKAMRUP(M) oASSAM 3:UTPALoBAISHYA oS/O-oKAMESHWERoBAISHYA PageoNo.#o2/3 oR/O-oSAUKUCHI oDIST-oKAMRUP(M) oASSAM 4:MANJIIToRABHA oS/O-oPARESHoRABHA oR/O-oJARAPARA oP.O-oBOKO oDIST-oKAMRUP oASSAM 5:BRINDABANoDAS oS/O-oSRIoCHANoDAS oR/O-oHAJO oPANIPARA oDIST-oKAMRUP(M) oASSAM 6:ATIKURoRAHAMAN oS/O-oSRIoJIYAURoRAHAMAN oR/O-oDIMAPUR oHAJO oKAMRUP oASSAM 7:KAMALoSHILL oS/O-oKANUoSHILL oR/O-oDWARKUCHI oTAMULPUR oDIST-oBAKSHA oASSAo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oDoDASoSR.oADVo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oFORoCAVEATORoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BEFORE HONOURABLEoTHEoCHIEFoJUSTICE HONOURABLEoMR.oJUSTICEoSUMANoSHYAM ORDERo

16.02.2024 .(Vijay...Bishnoi,.CJ) The matter comes up for consideration of the application preferred on Page No.# 3/3 behalf of the appellant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act with a prayer to condone the delay of 38 days in filing the connected writ appeal. Mr. S. Chakrborty, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 7. However, no reply to the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed. The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that due to some unavoidable circumstances, the writ appeal could not be filed within the period of limitation. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 7 has vehemently opposed the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and has submitted that the reasons supplied by the applicants in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act are not sufficient to condone the delay. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the contents of the application and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay of 38 days in filing the present appeal. Hence, the I.A.(Civil) No.412/2024 is allowed. The delay of 38 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. Registry is directed to register the writ appeal and place it for admission after two weeks.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant