Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010213752024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) I.A.(Civil)/3285/2024 BIJU KALITA W/O LATE KANDARPA KALITA R/O BARKUCHI CHOWK OPP. MALI DHABA P.O. MIRZA P.S.PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM. ALL ARE LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE KANDARPA KALITA. 2: INDRAJIT KALITA S/O LATE KANDARPA KALITA R/O BARKUCHI CHOWK OPP. MALI DHABA P.O. MIRZA P.S.PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM. ALL ARE LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE KANDARPA KALITA. 3: ARCHANA KALITA D/O LATE KANDARPA KALITA R/O BARKUCHI CHOWK OPP. MALI DHABA P.O. MIRZA P.S.PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM. ALL ARE LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE KANDARPA KALITA. VERSUS SMT REENA HAZARIKA CHUTIA S/O SRI PRADIP KR. CHUTIA R/O AZARA P.O. and P.S. AZARA DIST. KAMRUP Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM PIN 781017 ------------ Advocate for : MR.N N UPADHAYA Advocate for : MR. R SARMAH appearing for SMT REENA HAZARIKA CHUTIA BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 29.08.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. D.K.Bagchi appearing on behalf of Mr. B.B. Kakati for the appellants/applicants and learned counsel Mr. A. Hussain for the Respondent . 2. By filing this interlocutory application, the applicants have prayed for setting aside the abatement in the connected RSA 67/2016 in so far as the deceased appellant Kandarpa Kalita is concerned by condoning delay of 159 days in filing the application for setting aside abatement of the aforementioned deceased appellant. 3. Learned for the applicants submits that during pendency of the connected RSA 67/2016, the appellant Kandarpa Kalita expired on 23.10.2023 leaving behind his wife, one son and a daughter, namely, Biju Kalita, Indrajit Kalita and Archana Kalita. The engaged counsel was not aware of the death of the appellant and later on, learnt about the death of the appellant from one of his junior practising in the Court at Amingaon on 11.09.2024 and as such, the applicant has prayed for condoning the delay of 159 days in filing the application for setting aside abatement of the deceased appellant. Page No.# 3/3 4. The learned counsel for the sole respondent has no objection. 5. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the parties and as sufficient grounds have been shown, the delay of 159 days in filing the application for setting aside abatement is hereby condoned. 6. In terms of the above observation, the interlocutory application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant