Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25460 (GAU)

LIBERTY GENERAL INSURANCE LTD. v. RANJITA NATH AND 6 ORS

I.A.(Civil)/3591/2024 · 2025-12-02

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010238612024 2025:GAU-AS:16561 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3591/2024 LIBERTY GENERAL INSURANCE LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT 10TH FLOOR, TOWER A, PENINSULA BUSINESS PARK, GANPATRAO KADAM MARG, LOWER PAREL (WEST) MUMBAI-400013, MAHARASHTRA AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR, GANAPATI ENCLAVE, BORA SERVICE, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (M), PIN-781007. VERSUS RANJITA NATH AND 6 ORS W/O. LATE HEMEN CHANDRA NATH 2:SAURAV NATH S/O. LATE HEMEN CHANDRA NATH 3:MINTU NATH S/O. LATE HEMEN CHANDRA NATH 4:KRISHNA NATH D/O. LATE HEMEN CHANDRA NATH 5:TARUBALA NATH M/O. LATE HEMEN CHANDRA NATH ALL ARE THE RESIDENT OF VILL.- UTTAR GANAK GARI P/S. SARBHOG DIST. BARPETA ASSAM. 6:GURUDEV DAS S/O. KAMALESWAR DAS R/O. VILL.- CHAKBAUSI P/O. BHALUKDOBA P/S. SORBHOG DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781317. Page No.# 2/2 7:KHANINDRAJIT DAS S/O. BISHNU RAM DAS R/O. VILL.- PHEHURAHKOWA P/O. BHULUKA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781317 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR T KALITA, Advocate for the Respondent : MS. M MALLIK (R-6), MR. N. DEBNATH (R-1 TO 5),MR. B HUSSAIN(R-6),MS. M PATHAK(R-6) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 03.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. T. Kalita, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. N. Debnath, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and Ms. M. Mallik, learned counsel for the respondent No.6. 2. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 173 of the M.V. Act for condonation of delay of 204 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal. 3. Learned counsels for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and respondent No.6 have jointly submitted that they have no objection if the delay is condoned. 4. This Court finds that the delay has been satisfactorily explained. 5. Therefore, the delay stands condoned. 6. The connected MAC Appeal shall be registered and listed for admission hearing. 7. With the aforesaid direction, this I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant