Page No.# 1/3 GAHC020001172025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/224/2024 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIVISIONAL OFFICE DIMAPUR NAGALAND-7971121 VERSUS SMTI. JAMUNA DEVI AND 4 ORS PERMANENT R/O SUKHANJAN NEPALI BASTI P.S. BOKAJAN KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM-782480 TEMPORARY R/O RIVER BELT COLONY DIMAPUR NAGALAND MOTHER OF LATE AMAR ARJEL 2:SHRI RIKHIRAM ARJEL FATHER OF LATE AMAR ARJEL PERMANENT R/O SUKHANJAN NEPALI BASTI P.S. BOKAJAN KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM-782480 TEMPORARY R/O RIVER BELT COLONY DIMAPUR NAGALAND 3:SHRI SHANKAR ARJEL BROTHER OF LATE AMAR ARJEL PERMANENT R/O SUKHANJAN NEPALI BASTI P.S. BOKAJAN KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM-782480 TEMPORARY R/O RIVER BELT COLONY DIMAPUR NAGALAND 4:SHRI BABUL CH TALUKDAR Page No.# 2/3 S/O LT. BANESHWAR KALITA R/O SATAGAON PRAGATI NAGAR VILLAGE WARD NO. 52 H.NO. 73 4TH B/LANE UDAYANBIHAR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781026 (OWNER OF BOLERO B/R NO AS-01 AR 9396) 5:SHRI ABDUL HAKIM TAPADAR S/O AMTAJ ALI TAPADAR R/O PAIKAN VOLLAGE PO-GUMRA BAZAR P.S. KATIGORAH DIST CACHAR ASSAM-788815 ------------ Advocate for : PFOSEKHO PFOTTE Advocate for : appearing for SMTI. JAMUNA DEVI AND 4 ORS BEFORE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 21.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. Pfosekho Pfotte, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant. Also heard Mr. Z. Kulnu, learned counsel for the claimant/opposite parties. 2. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 by the applicant/Insurance Company praying for condoning the delay of 38 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal whereby the applicant has been impugned the Judgment and Award dated 08.08.2024 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dimapur, Nagaland in MACT Case No. 85/2023. 3. Since, the learned counsel for the claimants/respondents has appeared and has not objected to the prayer for condoning the delay in Page No.# 3/3 preferring the connected MAC Appeal and since the grounds mentioned by the applicant for preferring the connected MAC Appeal beyond the period of limitation, appears to be sufficient and good grounds, the prayer for condoning the delay in preferring the connected MAC Appeal is hereby allowed and the delay of 38 days in filing the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant