Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010188452024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3678/2024 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MIDDLETON STREET, KOLKATA AND ONE OF THE REGIONAL OFFICES KNOWN AS GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI-5, ASSAM. VERSUS SMTI SUBHASI DAS AND ORS W/O LT. SUDHIR CH. DAS, M/O LATE SAMIR KR. DAS, R/O VILL. SOUTH TOKRACHARA PART-IV, P.O. AND P.S. GOLAKGANJ, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM 2:ARCHANA DAS W/O LT. SAMIR CH. DAS R/O VILL. SOUTH TOKRACHARA PART-IV P.O. AND P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 3:ON THE DEATH OF OPPOSITE PARTY NO 3 ECHA HAQUE ALI AHMED HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND REPRRESENTATIVE WITH HIS PLACE OF DWELLING SMT. AJIJA KHAUTN AHMED W/O LATE ECHA HAQUE ALI AHMED R/O VILL. DEBETTAR HASDAHA P.O. GOLAKGANJ P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783334 4:MR ARIF AHMED Page No.# 2/4 S/O LATE ECHA HAQUE ALI AHMED R/O VILL. DEBETTAR HASDAHA P.O. GOLAKGANJ P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 78333 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K K BHATRA, MS P HUJURI Advocate for the Respondent : MS S. BASAK (R-3,4), MR. B HALDAR (R-3,4) Linked Case : MACApp./131/2020 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MIDDLETON STREET KOLKATA AND ONE OF THE REGIONAL OFFICES KNOWN AS GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-5 ASSAM. VERSUS SMTI SUBHASI DAS AND 2 ORS W/O LT. SUDHIR CH. DAS M/O LATE SAMIR KR. DAS R/O VILL. SOUTH TOKRACHARA PART-IV P.O. AND P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 2:ARCHANA DAS W/O LT. SAMIR CH. DAS R/O VILL. SOUTH TOKRACHARA PART-IV P.O. AND P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 3:ECHA HAQUE ALI AHMED Page No.# 3/4 S/O LATE JANE ALI MUNSHI VILL. DEBETTAR HASDAHA P.O. GOLAKGANJ P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783334 ------------ Advocate for : MR. K K BHATRA Advocate for : MRS. K DEVI appearing for SMTI SUBHASI DAS AND 2 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 05.12.2025 1. Heard Ms. A. Biyani, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. K. Devi, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed by the applicant/Insurance Company praying for condoning the delay of 774 days in filing the application for setting aside of abetment and substitution of legal heirs of the deceased respondent No. 3, who was the owner of vehicle. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at the time effecting the notices issued to respondent No. 3, namely, Echa Haque Ahmed by dasti mode, the present applicant came to know that the said respondent has already expired on 28.05.2021. 4. She submits that since the respondent No.3 is the owner of offending vehicle and since one of the ground in this appeal preferred by the present applicant is in fraction of the policy Page No.# 4/4 conditions, hence, respondent No.3 is necessary party. 5. She submits that the reasons for approaching this Court beyond the prescribed period of limitation for setting aside the abetment as well as substitution of legal representative of respondent No. 3 has been mentioned in paragraph No. 3, 5 and 6 of the instant condonation of delay application. 6. She submit that the grounds mentioned in the aforesaid paragraphs are sufficient cause, which prevented to present applicant in approaching this Court by filing the application for setting aside of abatement and substitution within the prescribed period of limitation. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that considering the grounds shown by the applicant in the delay condonation application, she has no objection if the delay is condoned. 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the ground shown in paragraph Nos. 3, 5 and 6 of the delay condonation application to be sufficient ground, which prevented the present applicant from approaching this Court within prescribed period of limitation, the delay of 774 days in preferring the application for setting aside of abetment and substitution is hereby condoned and this Interlocutory Application is accordingly, allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant