Page No.# 1/5 GAHC030007922024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/207/2024 Smt. Lalhlupuii D/o C. Sangkunga (L) and Lalrawni (L), R/o Ramthar Veng, Aizawl VERSUS Smt. Zohmingthangi D/o C. Sangkunga (L) and Lalrawni (L), R/o Ramthar Veng, Aizawl Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms C Lalrinpuii Advocate for the Respondent : Ms. Rosalynn L Hmar Linked Case : RFA/49/2024 Smt. Lalhlupuii D/o C. Sangkunga (L) and Lalrawni (L) R/o Ramthar Veng Aizawl VERSUS Smt. Zohmingthangi D/o C. Sangkunga (L) and Lalrawni (L) R/o Ramthar Veng Aizawl Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms C Lalrinpuii Page No.# 2/5 Advocate for the Respondent : Ms. Rosalynn L Hmar ORDER BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI 19.05.2025 Heard Ms. C. Lalrinpuii, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Rosalyn L Hmar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. By way of this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicant is seeking condonation of delay of 83 days in filing the connected Regular First Appeal against the impugned Judgment and Order Decree dated 20.06.2024 passed by the Ld. Civil Judge (Senior Division –II), Aizawl District, Aizawl, Mizoram in Succession Case No. 655 of 2018. 3. The brief facts of the case is that, in the Succession Case No. 655 of 2018 filed by the applicant upon the Judgment and Order being pronounced, the applicant being aggrieved has preferred the connected Regular First Appeal. However, there has been an unintentional delay of 83 days in filing the connected appeal. Hence, the present condonation application. 4. Ms. C. Lalrinpuii, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the delay is totally unintentional and has been occasioned due to the time taken for engaging the counsel and therefore, re-engaging another counsel in filing the appeal, as the earlier counsel, due to certain developments, could not continue appearing for the applicant. 5. Per contra, Ms. Rosalyn L. Hmar, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the condonation application by saying that there were no Page No.# 3/5 serious hurdles or obstructions for the applicant to prefer the Regular First Appeal on time and the grounds stated in the application are not sufficient and bonafide for condonation. 6. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the contending parties and I have perused the materials available on record. 7. It appears that in filing the connected Regular First Appeal, there has been a delay of 83 days. The grounds of delay as explained in the condonation application reads as under: “2. That the Ld. Trial Court on 20.06.2024 pronounced the Judgement & Order in connection with the Succession Case No. 655 of 2018 wherein the Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant at the Lower Court was also present. Even though, the Judgement was pronounced verbally the copy of the Judgement & Order Dated 20.06.2024 was not furnished to the Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant. Therefore, on the day itself i.e., on 20.06.2024 the Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant at the Lower Court applied for Certified True Copies of the Judgment & Order Dated 20.06.2024 and the same was issued on 26.06.2024. On receiving the Judgment & Order Dated 20.06.2024 the Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant at the Lower Court contacted the Applicant/Appellant to meet her on 28.06.2024. (Photo Copy of CTC copies of the impugned Judgement & Order and Decree Dated 20.06.2024 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure 1 & Annexure 1A respectively). 3. That on 28.06.2024 the Applicant/Appellant had a meeting and her Counsel informed her that whether she would be interested to take up her case for appeal. The Applicant/Appellant finally made a decision on 05.07.2024 to take up her case for appeal and informed the same to her Counsel. The said Counsel immediately took efforts in securing a competent Advocate for the Applicant/Appellant to represent her. However, as the Courts are closed for summer vacation from the dates between 8th July -12th July' 2024 no effective steps could be taken. 4. That the Applicant/Appellant with the assistance of her Counsel continued to search for a competent and suitable Advocate and was finally able to contact the Advocate namely J.H. Ramneihmawia on 26.07.2024. The Advocate J.H. Ramneihmawia after meeting up with the Applicant/Appellant decided to go through the case and thereafter Page No.# 4/5 on 31.07.2024 the said Advocate informed the Applicant/Appellant that he would be willing to take up the case for Appeal. As the Advocate- J.H.Ramneihmawia was in the midst of the case study and for Appeal of the case a Notification No. HC.XXXVII-12/2024/213/R.Cell Dated Guwahati, the 14th August, 2024 was issued by the Gauhati High Court notifying the Examination date i.e., on the 14th September'2024 which is in pursuant to the Notification No. HC.XXXVII-12/2024/144/R.Cell Dated Guwahati, the 31st May, 2024, for the appointment to 1 (one) vacant post of Grade-I, Mizoram Judicial Service. (Photo Copy of the Gauhati High Court Notification No. HC.XXXVII- 12/2024/144/R.Cell Dated Guwahati, the 31st May, 2024 & Photo copy of the Gauhati High Court Notification No. HC.XXXVII- 12/2024/213/R.Cell Dated Guwahati, the 14th August, 2024 are annexed hereto and respectively marked as Annexures-2 & 3). 5. That as the Advocate- J.H. Ramneihmawia pursued the said Examination the present Appeal could not be taken up promptly. Thereafter, the Gauhati High Court issued another Notification No. HC.XXXVII- 12/2024/250/R.Cell Dated Guwahati, the 27th September, 2024 wherein the Advocate-J.H September, 2024 wherein the Advocate- J.H Ramneihmawia's name was enlisted amongst the qualifying persons selected for Mains Written Examination, Grade-1, Direct Recruitment, Mizoram Judicial Service which was to be held on 22nd & 23rd November' 2024. Since the Applicant/Appellant has been prolonged and delayed due to the said Advocate's unforeseen and unintended delay, the said Advocate informed the Applicant/Appellant to meet him on 14.11.2024 to have a discussion on how to continue with this present Appeal. (Photo copy of the Gauhati High Court Notification No. HC.XXXVII-12/2024/250/R.Cell Dated Guwahati, the 27th September, 2024 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure-4). 6. That on 14.11.2024 the Applicant/Appellant had a g meeting with the said Advocate and came to a conclusion to look for another suitable Counsel as suggested by the said Advocate. 7. That the Applicant/Appellant approached the present Counsel on 19.11.2024 and handed over all the required documents. The present counsel informed the Applicant/Appellant that she would require atleast 2 days to go through the case before confirmation. 8. That on 22.06.2024 the present Counsel informed the Applicant/Appellant that she would take up this present Appeal. The present Counsel spent 19 days i.e., from 23.11.2024-11.12.2024 to go through all the documents in detail, drafting of Memorandum of Appealand its connected Application and for compilation. 9. That after drafting and compilation were done, the Page No.# 5/5 Applicant/Appellant subsequently filed the connected First Appeal without any further delay.” 8. Reading the aforesaid averments, it appears that though initially the applicant took some time to decide whether the applicant would file the appeal or not, however, after deciding to file the appeal, the applicant immediately engaged the services of one counsel who, however, during the preparation of the appeal, was selected for the Mains Written Examination Grade –I, direct recruitment of Mizoram Judicial Service and therefore, the applicant had to later on re-engage the present counsel, who, after perusing the documents, prepared the appeal memo and has filed it. It is in the aforesaid events that a delay of 83 days has occurred. That being so, this Court is fully satisfied that the delay has been sufficiently explained and the same is bonafide. Hence, the delay of 83 days is condoned. 9. Accordingly, the application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant