Page No.# 1/4 GAHC030006332024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/172/2024 Smt. Chawngthantluangi D/o Hnunliana(L) R/o Mission Veng, Aizawl VERSUS Smt. Saikhumi (L) and Anr. W/o Hnunliana (L) R/o Mission Veng, Aizawl Represented by Her Son Sh. Chawngthansanga, S/o Hnunliana(L) R/o Mission Veng and her daughter Smt. Chawngthanzuali D/o Hnunliana (L) R/o Mission Veng, Aizawl 2:Sh. Chawngthansang Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu Advocate for the Respondent : Linked Case : RFA/34/2024 Smt. Chawngthantluangi D/o Hnunliana (L) R/o Mission Veng Aizawl Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS Smt. Saikhumi (L) and Anr. W/o Hnunliana (L) R/o Mission Veng Aizawl Represented by Her Son Sh. Chawngthansanga S/o Hnunliana(L) R/o Mission Veng and her daughter Smt. Chawngthanzuali D/o Hnunliana (L) R/o Mission Veng Aizawl 2:Sh. Chawngthansanga S/o Hnunliana(L) R/o Mission Veng Aizawl Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. C Tlanthianghlima Legal Aid Counsel ORDER BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO 17.03.2025 Heard Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned counsel for the applicant who submits that by filing this application, the applicant seeks condonation of 897 delay in filing the connected appeal. Referring to the application, the learned counsel submits that the delay was on account of late knowledge about the Page No.# 3/4 Heirship Certificate issued to the respondent and that once the same came to his knowledge, he took necessary steps to prefer an appeal. Therefore, it is due to this reason that the delay has occasioned. Mr. C. Tlanthianghlima, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent submits that although the respondent has not filed objection to the application but it appears that the applicant took his own time to file the connected appeal even after having knowledge about the Heirship Certificate. He however submits that under the facts and circumstance, Court may consider and pass appropriate order as it deems fit and proper. Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties and upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court is of the view that the delay in filing the connected appeal should be condoned particularly having regard to the fact that the Heirship Certificate which is challenged has been issued without prior notice to the opposite party. In view of above, the delay of 897 days in filing the connected appeal stands condoned. I.A is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant