Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010127122023 2025:GAU-AS:6109 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2164/2023 SADHU SAIKIA S/O LATE PRAHLAD SAIKIA, R/O MACHARHAT, JB ROAD, DIST.- JORHAT, ASSAM. VERSUS FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA (FCI) AND 3 ORS. REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI. 2:THE GENERAL MANAGER FCI REGIONAL OFFICE ULUBARI GUWAHATI. 3:THE DISTRICT MANAGER (AM) FCI DISTRICT OFFICE JORHAT. 4:THE AREA MANAGER FCI JORHAT Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. JYOTIRMOY ROY, MS E NATH,MR. C CHAKRAVARTY,MR. R HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : MR B K SINGH, Page No.# 2/3 Linked Case : SADHU SAIKIA VERSUS FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA (FCI) AND 3 ORS. H ------------ Advocate for : MR. R HAZARIKA Advocate for : appearing for FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA (FCI) AND 3 ORS. H BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 16.05.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. B. P. Sharma on behalf of learned counsel Mr. R. Hazarika representing the respondent. 2. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 with prayer for condonation of delay of 115 days in preferring the connected appeal. The applicant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 29.10.2022, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Jorhat in Money Suit No. 02/2020. 3. It is submitted that after the judgment and decree, the applicant was advised over mobile phone to prefer an appeal before the Gauhati High Court and he was requested to collect the judgment from the office. Thereafter, the Page No.# 3/3 applicant collected the copies of the judgment and decree and acted upon the advice of the engaged counsel whom he consulted on 11.12.2022. After consultation with the family members, the applicant decided to prefer this appeal. The delay was owing to the winter vacation followed by the bihu vacation of this Court from 23.12.2022 and 16.01.2023, and thereafter on 20.01.2023, the applicant consulted with the engaged counsel stationed at Guwahati. 4. It is submitted that the delay was not intentional. There is every possibility that the appeal may succeed. The applicant has shown sufficient grounds. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. The delay of 115 days is thereby condoned. 7. Registry to register the connected appeal. 8. In terms of the above observation, this I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant