Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010019702024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/450/2024 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI- 7. VERSUS BORNALI GOGOI AND 8 ORS. W/O LATE PALASH GOGOI @ PALAKSH GOGOI @ POLAKH GOGOI, VILL.- JERAI DIGHALIBARI GAON, P.O.- PANITOLA, P.S.- CHABUA, DIST.- TINSUKIA, ASSAM- 786183. 2:JASHMIN GOGOI D/O LATE PALASH GOGOI @ PALAKSH GOGOI @ POLAKH GOGOI VILL.- JERAI DIGHALIBARI GAON P.O.- PANITOLA P.S.- CHABUA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM- 786183. 3:NAVASHREE GOGOI D/O LATE PALASH GOGOI @ PALAKSH GOGOI @ POLAKH GOGOI VILL.- JERAI DIGHALIBARI GAON P.O.- PANITOLA P.S.- CHABUA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM- 786183. 4:MOON BAHADUR CHETRY S/O SRI JIT BAHADUR CHETRY Page No.# 2/4 R/O SRIPURIA NEW COLONY TINSUKIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM- 786125. 5:PRAKASH SHAH S/O NANDU SHAH R/O UCHAMATI DOOMDOOMA P.O.- DOOMDOOMA P.S.- DOOMDOOMA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM- 786125. 6:PRIYA SARKAR W/O SRI PRALOY SARKAR R/O KHAGESWAR NEW COLONT TINSUKIA P.O.- TINSUKIA P.S.- TINSUKIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM- 786125. 7:THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED DOOMDOOMA BRANCH HAVING ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT RANGAGORA ROAD TINSUKIA PLAZA COMPLEX 2 FLOOR TINSUKIA P.O.- TINSUKIA P.S.- TINSUKIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125 Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS B ACHARYA, MR. A ACHARYA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. P J BARMAN (r-7), MR. N D SARMA (R-1,2,3),MR. M MORE (R-1,2,3),MS P PHUKAN (r-7) Page No.# 3/4 Linked Case : THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD VERSUS BORNALI GOGOI AND 8 ORS F ------------ Advocate for : MRS B ACHARYA Advocate for : appearing for BORNALI GOGOI AND 8 ORS F Linked Case : THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD VERSUS BORNALI GOGOI AND 8 ORS F ------------ Advocate for : MRS B ACHARYA Advocate for : appearing for BORNALI GOGOI AND 8 ORS F BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 24 .06. 2026 Heard Mr. A. Acharya, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. P.J. Barman, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 i.e. the other insurance Page No.# 4/4 company and Mr. M. More, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. TCR has been received. 3. The notice on respondent Nos. 1, i.e. the claimant and the respondent 2 & 3 have already been served. The respondent No.4 is the driver of the vehicle is not the necessary party in the present proceeding as submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant. 4. Since the connected appeal is against the quantum, hence the name of the respondent No. 4 be struck off. Similarly, the respondent Nos. 8 and 9 who are parents of the deceased are also not necessary parties since the award has been made in favour of the wife of the deceased. Hence, the respondent Nos. 8 and 9 are also struck off. 5. The respondent No. 6 is also struck off, being the owner of the other vehicle and he is not a necessary party. 6. This I.A. has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 102 days in preferring the connected appeal. 7. The reasons for delay has been stated in the instant petition, which I have perused. 8. The learned counsel for the claimant does not object to condone the delay. 9. Having regard to the above, the delay has been condoned. 10. The Registry is directed to register the connected appeal. 11. The I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant