Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010126392023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2474/2023 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ORIENTAL HOUSE, A-25/27, ASAF ALI ROAD, NEW DELHI- 110002, AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI- 7, REP. BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER. VERSUS SOBHA LIMBU RAI AND 3 ORS. W/O LATE SURAJ BAHADUR RAI, VILL.- DHAL BASTI, P.O.- PATHALIPAM, P.S.- BOGINADI, DIST.- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM. 2:ANSH RAI S/O LATE SURAJ BAHADUR RAI VILL.- DHAL BASTI P.O.- PATHALIPAM P.S.- BOGINADI DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. 3:MD. NAZRUL KHAN S/O MAJIBAR R/O LOKBANDHU NAGAR P.O.- KAHILIPARA P.S.- DIPSUR DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM. 4:INDIRA SAIKIA S/O MULULA CH. SAIKIA Page No.# 2/4 VILL.- LALUK P.O. AND P.S.- LALUK DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SISHIR DUTTA, MS S MOCHAHARI,MR. S DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N. DEBNATH (R-1,2), Linked Case : MACApp. No. 6779/2023 (Filing Number) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. VERSUS SOBHA LIMBU RAI AND 3 ORS. E ------------ Advocate for : MR SISHIR DUTTA Advocate for : appearing for SOBHA LIMBU RAI AND 3 ORS. E Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG 05/05/2025 Mr. S Dutta, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the appeal is against the quantum and therefore, the presence of the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 being the owner and the driver of the offended vehicle are not necessary in the present application. As such, he prays for striking of the names of the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 from the cause title. Prayer is allowed. Let the name of the respondents Nos. 3 & 4 be struck off from the cause title at the risk of the applicant. The applicant shall file an amended cause title removing the names of the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 from the cause title, and the Registry shall do the needful. Mr. N Debnath, learned counsel appeared in the case on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. However, his name has not been reflected in the cause list. This is an application filed under Section 173 Second proviso of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 129 days in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment and order dated 31.10.2022, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in MAC Case No. 720/2019. The ground for delay in not preferring the connected appeal on time has been explained at paragraph 4 of this application. I have perused the same. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and on consideration of the explanation given in paragraph 4 of the application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the connected appeal, this Court is of the view that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause in not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time. Since the learned counsel for the respondent remained absent without any steps, it is presumed that the respondents have no objection for condoning the delay. Page No.# 4/4 In view of the above, the delay of 129 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned. With the above, this I.A. stands disposed of. Registry is directed to register the connected appeal and list it for admission, by showing the name of Mr. N Debnath, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in the cause list. JUDGE Comparing Assistant