PRIOM CHOUDHURY, v. M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
I.A.(Civil)/4013/2018 · 2025-04-29
Budi Habung
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20980 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20980 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010246762018
2025:GAU-AS:5242
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/4013/2018 PRIOM CHOUDHURY, S/O- BIDYUT KR. CHOUDHURY R/O- AZAD HIND ROAD, CHENGKURI ROAD, LANE NO. 3, P.O.- SILCHAR- 7, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REP. BY THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. PWD ROAD, TOWN CLUB BUILDING, P.O.- SILCHAR-1, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M TALUKDAR, MR. A SHAKIL Advocate for the Respondent : ,
Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 30-04-2025 Heard Mr. M. Talukdar, learned counsel for the applicant. Notice upon the respondent no. 3 is duly served. However, no one appears on behalf of the respondent no. 3. On the earlier occasions also, the respondent no. 3 remained absent despite of receipt of notice. However, the respondent no. 3 was given one more chance for appearance. But today also the respondent is not represented. In view of the above, this Court deems it fit to proceed with the matter in absence of the respondent no. 3. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 69 days in filing the restoration petition. The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on 23.07.2018. The grounds for delay in filing the restoration petition has been explained in paragraphs 1 to 13 of the delay condonation petition. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and having gone through the grounds stated in the above paragraphs seeking condonation of the delay of 69 days in filing the restoration petition, this Court is of the view that the applicant was prevented by a sufficient cause in not filing the connected restoration petition in time.
Page No.# 3/3 The respondent despite of receipt of notice has not appeared. Therefore, it is presumed that the respondent has no objection in condoning the delay of 69 days. In view of the above, the delay of 69 days in filing the restoration petition is hereby condoned. With the above, this IA stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant