VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2024 › High Court of Gauhati

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Rupashri Sinha @ Rupashri Singha and 5 Ors

Disposed Of
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
26 May 2024
Bench
S. Justice Marli Vankungauthor
Case no.
I.A.(Civil) 3270/2023

Judgment

ORDER Date : 27.05.2024 Heard Mr. S. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant along with Mr. L. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the claimant/respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4. It is seen that Office note dated 06.03.2024, shows that A/D card or un-served notice upon respondent Nos. 5 and 7 is not returned till date, while A/D card of respondent No.6 has arrived bearing the signature of the mother of respondent No.6. It is also seen that more than 1(one) month has lapsed since notice was issued to respondents No. 5 and 7. In view of the above, notice is deemed to be served upon respondent No.6 as prayed for. This Court find it fit to dispose of the instant application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for condonation of delay of 59 days in filing the instant appeal against the Page No.# 4/4 impugned judgment and award dated 11.04.2023 by the Learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cachar at Silchar, Assam in M.A.C Case No. 436/2019. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 submits that they will not be filing any written objection against the application for condonation of delay. Mr. S. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant submits the reasons for the delay has highlighted in paragraph 5 of the application, which shows that the delay was not due to any negligence or latches on the part of the applicant, but mainly due to the usual office procedures, which had to be followed for which the appeal could not be filed within time. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and have considered the fact that the counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 has preferred not to file any written objection. On perusal, this Court is satisfied with the explanation, highlighted in the application at paragraph 5. This Court finds that the delay was not due to any negligence or latches on the part of the applicant and accordingly the application for condoning the delay of 59 days is allowed. I.A.(Civil)/3270/2023is allowed and disposed of as above. The MAC Appeal is to be given a Registration number by the Registry and the matter is to be listed for admission in due course after 1(one) week.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010203922023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/3270/2023o THEoORIENTALoINSURANCEoCO.oLTD.o AoCOMPANYoREGISTEREDoUNDERoTHEoCOMPANIESoACT,o1956.oREP.oBYoITS REGIONALoMANAGER,oULUBARI,oITSoREGIONALoMANAGER,oULUBARI,o GUWAHATI-o7,oDIST.-oKAMRUP,oASSAM. VERSUSo RUPASHRIoSINHAo@oRUPASHRIoSINGHAoANDo5oORS.o W/OoLATEoNIRANJANoSINHAo@oNIRANJANoSINGHA,o VILL.-oT/AoPOLICEoQUARTER,oDURGAPALLY,oP.O.-oGHUNGOOR,oP.S.-o SILCHAR,oDIST.-oCACHAR,oASSAM,oPIN-o788014.o PERMANENToADDRESS-oVILL.-oRUPATGRAM,oP.S.-oRATABARI,oDIST.-o KARIMGANJ,oASSAM. 2:NEHAoSINHA oD/OoLATEoNIRANJANoSINHAo@oNIRANJANoSINGHA o VILL.-oT/AoPOLICEoQUARTER oDURGAPALLY oP.O.-oGHUNGOOR oP.S.-oSILCHAR oDIST.-oCACHAR oASSAM oPIN-o788014.o PERMANENToADDRESS-oVILL.-oRUPATGRAM oP.S.-oRATABARI oDIST.-oKARIMGANJ oASSAM. 3:RUHANoSINHA oS/OoLATEoNIRANJANoSINHAo@oNIRANJANoSINGHA o PageoNo.#o2/4 VILL.-oT/AoPOLICEoQUARTER oDURGAPALLY oP.O.-oGHUNGOOR oP.S.-oSILCHAR oDIST.-oCACHAR oASSAM oPIN-o788014.o PERMANENToADDRESS-oVILL.-oRUPATGRAM oP.S.-oRATABARI oDIST.-oKARIMGANJ oASSAM.o (BEINGoMINOR oREP.oBYoRESPONDENToNO.o1). 4:RUPOMoSINHA oS/OoLATEoNIRANJANoSINHAo@oNIRANJANoSINGHA o VILL.-oT/AoPOLICEoQUARTER oDURGAPALLY oP.O.-oGHUNGOOR oP.S.-oSILCHAR oDIST.-oCACHAR oASSAM oPIN-o788014.o PERMANENToADDRESS-oVILL.-oRUPATGRAM oP.S.-oRATABARI oDIST.-oKARIMGANJ oASSAM.o (BEINGoMINOR oREP.oBYoRESPONDENToNO.o1). 5:MONIRoUDDINoCHOUDHURY oS/OoLATEoFOJIJURoRAHMANoCHOUDHURY o VILL.-oKAJIDAHARoPART-oIII oP.O.-oBOALIJUR oP.S.-oSONAI oDIST.-oCACHAR oASSAM. 6:TAZIMoUDDINoBARBHUIYA oS/OoLATEoNOORoUDDINoBARBHUIYA o R/OoDUDPATIL oKORILPARoPART-oIV oHATICHERRA oP.S.-oSILCHAR oDIST.-oCACHAR Page No.# 3/4 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GOSWAMI Advocate for the Respondent : MR. L R MAZUMDER (R-1,2) Linked Case : THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD VERSUS RUPASHRI SINHA @ RUPASHRI SINGHA AND 5 ORS. H ------------ Advocate for : MR. S K GOSWAMI Advocate for : appearing for RUPASHRI SINHA @ RUPASHRI SINGHA AND 5 ORS. H BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG

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.