Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010237382022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : MC/8/2022 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 19 RELIANCE CENTRE, WALCHAND HIRACHAND MARG, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI 400001 AND ONE OF ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT ABC, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI VERSUS MD ABUL HUSSAIN AND 2 ORS S/O LATE ADAM ALI, R/O VILL. JHAGRAPAR, PT-III, P.S. DHUBRI, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN 783301 2:KISHORE KUMAR DAS S/O LATE HARI MOHAN DAS R/O A.M. ROAD NAGALAND MOKOCHUNG P.S. MOKOCHUNG DIST. MOKOCHUNG (NAGALAND) PIN 79860 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K K BHATRA, MS. R DEVI,MS JONA TALUKDAR,MR J JOHN Advocate for the Respondent : MS F BEGUM (r-1), MR S PAUL (r-1) Linked Case : RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Page No.# 2/3 VERSUS MD ABUL HUSSAIN AND 2 ORS ------------ Advocate for : Advocate for : appearing for MD ABUL HUSSAIN AND 2 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 01.06.2026 Heard Mr. K. K. Bhatta, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. F. Begum, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. 2. Mr. Bhatta, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in respect of the respondent No. 2, service has been effected by substituted mode (Paper Publication) and to that effect, one affidavit has been filed on 14.05.2026, enclosing the relevant newspaper, where the notice was published. 3. It appears from the affidavit that the notice was published in the newspaper, namely, Nagaland Post, on 20.03.2026. But, the respondent No. 2 has remained unrepresented today, even though, notice was deemed to have been served upon him. 4. It is to be noted here that his Miscellaneous Case No. 08/2022, has been filed by the applicant for restoration of the I.A. (Civil) No. 325/2019, which was dismissed for non-prosecution, vide order, dated 20.10.2022. 5. Mr. Bhatta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 20.10.2022, Page No.# 3/3 he was under the impression that the name of another counsel, namely, Mr. K. K. Bhatra has been reflected in the cause list and on account of the same, he could not appear before this Court on 20.10.2020, and it was not intentional, but bonafide mistake and therefore, it was contended to allow this application. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that she has no objection in allowing this application. 7. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties and also, considering the facts and circumstances on the record, especially, the explanation put forward at paragraph No. 5 of this application; this Court is inclined to allow this miscellaneous application. 8. Accordingly, this miscellaneous application stands disposed of. The I.A. (Civil) No. 325/2019, stands restored to the file. 9. Registry shall list the I.A. (Civil) No. 325/2019, before this Court, on 12.06.2026. JUDGE Comparing Assistant