- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 10 December 2024
- Bench
- Budi Habung
- Case no.
- I.A.(Civil) 3438/2023
Judgment
ORDER Date : 11.12
. 2024 Heard Ms. R.D. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. P. Bordoloi, learned counsel for the respondent/ opposite party No. 1. This is an application filed under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay of 118 days in preferring the connected appeal against the impugned judgment dated 30.11.2022, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Biswanath, Biswanath Chariali in MAC Case No. 124(D)/ 2015. The grounds for delay of 118 days have been properly explained in paragaraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the application. I have perused the same. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was an official delay of 20 days. The judgment was passed on 30.11.2022, and the dealing counsel provided his legal opinion only on 09.06.2023 i.e. after 91 days of passing of the judgment. Thereafter the file was put up before the competent authority for filing appeal. Accordingly, the appeal was prepared on 30.06.2023, and handed over to the chamber of counsel on the same date for filing the appeal. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the counsel took 11 days to prepare the appeal and thereafter, the appeal was filed on 11.07.2023, and in the process, there was a delay of 118 days. Thus, there was no deliberate negligent or latches on the part of the applicant for causing the delay in preferring the connected appeal. The learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the contention of delay by filing affidavit-in-opposite stating that the official delay cannot be reason for causing delay in Page No.# 4/4 preferring the connected appeal. I have perused the affidavit-in-opposition and considered. Heard both sides. On consideration, this court is satisfied that the applicant has been able to explain properly the ground for delay in filing the connected appeal and that the applicant was prevented from sufficient causes for not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time. In view of the above and for ends of justice, the delay of 118 days in filing the connected appeal is hereby condoned. The IA stands allowed and disposed of. Registry is directed to register the connected appeal and list the matter for admission.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010152222023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/3438/2023o UNITEDoINDIAoINSURANCEoCOMPANYoLTD.o (SUBSIDIARYoOFoGENERALoINSURANCEoCORPORATIONoOFoINDIA)o REGISTEREDoHEADoOFFICEoATo24oWHITESoROAD,oMADRAS-o600014oREP.o BYoTHEoADMINISTRATIVEoOFFICER,oGAUHATIoREGIONALoOFFICE,oG.S.o ROAD,oGUWAHATI-o781005. VERSUSo PARBATIoDEVIoANDo4oORS.o W/OoLATEoDALMOHANoCHETRY,o VILL.-oNO.o2oBORJARANI,oMONABARIoGRANT,o P.O.-oBORJARANI,o P.S.-oGINGIA,o DIST.-oSONITPUR,oASSAM,oPIN-o784184. 2:KHUSBUoDEVI oD/OoLATEoDALMOHANoCHETRY o VILL.-oNO.o2oBORJARANI oMONABARIoGRANT o P.O.-oBORJARANI o P.S.-oGINGIA o DIST.-oSONITPUR oASSAM oPIN-o784184. 3:DIBAKARoCHETRY oS/OoLATEoDALMOHANoCHETRY o VILL.-oNO.o2oBORJARANI Page No.# 2/4 MONABARI GRANT P.O.- BORJARANI P.S.- GINGIA DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784184. 4:MD. SAFIKUL ALAM S/O MD. KUDDUS ALI VILL.- BRAHMAPUTRA CHAPARI P.O.- BURIGANG P.S.- GINGIA DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784175. 5:MD. RABIUL HUSSAIN S/O MD. MIRJAD ALI VILL.- NO. 2 ADAVETI P.O.- TEWARIPAL P.S.- SOOTEA DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784175 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R D MOZUMDAR, MR. S P SHARMA,MS. C MOZUMDAR Advocate for the Respondent : MR. P J SAIKIA, SR. ADV, MR. P BORDOLOI,MS. M KECHII Linked Case : UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD VERSUS Page No.# 3/4 PARBATI DEVI AND 4 ORS (A) ------------ Advocate for : MS. R D MOZUMDAR Advocate for : appearing for PARBATI DEVI AND 4 ORS (A) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.