Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010161042018 2025:GAU-AS:11356 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2693/2018 SMTI MAKANI SONOWAL W/O LATE THAGENDRA SONOWAL @ KHAGEN SONOWAL, R/O VILL. BORBAM SONOWAL (KACHARI GAON), BORDOLONI, P.O. DEURI BORBAM, P.S. GOGAMUKH, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM. VERSUS SRI BUDHESWAR MANKI AND 2 ORS S/O SRI CHENIRAM MANKI, R/O VILL. BOGINODI, P.O. AND P.S. BOGINODI, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM (DRIVER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AS-07/C-7006), PIN 787001 2:SRI RAJU DOLEY S/O KIRAN DOLEY R/O VILL. KHURACHUK P.O. AND P.S. BOGINODI DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AS-07/C-7006) 787001 3:THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. NORTH LAHIMPUR BRANCH OPP OF GREEN VIEW HOTEL LAKHIMPUR NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 78700 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K K HANDIQUE, MR. R GOHAIN Advocate for the Respondent : , Linked Case : MACApp./682/2018 Page No.# 2/3 SMTI MAKANI SONOWAL W/O LATE THAGENDRA SONOWAL @ KHAGEN SONOWAL R/O VILL. BORBAM SONOWAL (KACHARI GAON) BORDOLONI P.O. DEURI BORBAM P.S. GOGAMUKH DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM. VERSUS SRI BUDHESWAR MANKI AND 2 ORS S/O SRI CHENIRAM MANKI R/O VILL. BOGINODI P.O. AND P.S. BOGINODI DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM (DRIVER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AS-07/C-7006) PIN 787001 2:SRI RAJU DOLEY S/O KIRAN DOLEY R/O VILL. KHURACHUK P.O. AND P.S. BOGINODI DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AS-07/C-7006) 787001 3:THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. NORTH LAHIMPUR BRANCH OPP OF GREEN VIEW HOTEL LAKHIMPUR NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787001 ------------ Advocate for : MR. K K HANDIQUE Advocate for : appearing for SRI BUDHESWAR MANKI AND 2 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 26.08.2025 Heard Mr. K. K. Handique, learned counsel for the applicant. The record reveals that notice upon the respondents No. 1 & 2 have been served and it was received personally by the said respondents. The record further reveals that notice upon the respondent No. 3 was also received. As the notice upon the respondent No. 3 was received, the notice is deemed to have been served upon the said respondent. Page No.# 3/3 However, none has appeared on behalf of any of the respondents. This is an application preferred by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, praying for condonation of delay of 274 days in preferring the connected appeal. The reasons for delay in not filing the connected appeal within the stipulated time, have been explained by the applicant in paragraphs No. 6 & 7 of the application. On consideration of the explanation given in the above-noted paragraphs; this Court is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by a sufficient cause in preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time. That apart, it is seen that despite receipt of notice by the respondents, they have not appeared in the matter. It is, therefore, presumed that they have no objection for such condonation of delay. In view of the above; the delay of 274 days in preferring the connected appeal, deserves to be condoned. It is hereby, accordingly, condoned. The interlocutory application stands allowed and accordingly, stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant