Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26228 (GAU)

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD v. MINU BAURI AND 4 ORS

I.A.(Civil)/2535/2024 · 2025-11-18

Mridul Kumar Kalita

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010165922024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2535/2024 CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT AASTHA PLAZA, OPPOSITE OF S.B. DEORAH COLLEGE, 4TH FLOOR, BORA SERVICE, GUWAHATI, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.(REPRESENTED BY IT'S DEPUTY MANAGER, MR. SABIR AHMED CHOUDHURY). VERSUS MINU BAURI AND 4 ORS W/O. OF LT. BIKI BAURI 2:AROTI BAWRI D/O. LT. BIKI BAUKI 3:PABITRA BAURI S/O. LT. BIKI BAURI ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BALIJAN PURANA LINE P.S. DERGAON DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785614. 4:UPENDRA SAHANI S/O. LABATRI SAHANI R/O.VILLAGE- DAKHIN DALIJALIA P.O. DERGAON DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785614. 5:RAM BABU SAHANI S/O. UPENDRA SAHANI R/O. VILLAGE- DAKHIN DALIJALIA Page No.# 2/3 P.O. DERGAON DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785614 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYYA, Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N. DEBNATH (R-1,2,3), BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 19.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. N. Debnath, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants Nos. 1 to 3. 2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been preferred by the applicant Insurance Company praying for condonation of delay of 35 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal whereby the judgment and award dated 09.04.2024 passed in MAC Case No. 42/2022 by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup(M), Guwahati has been impugned. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that since the delay is only of 35 days, he does not have any objection if the same is condoned. 4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the grounds stated in the application for condonation of delay. 5. Considering the grounds mentioned in the paragraph Nos. 4 to 7 of the delay condonation application as well as considering the fact that the Page No.# 3/3 respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have no objection to the same, the delay of 35 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application is disposed of. 6. The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list this same for admission on a date to be fixed by it. JUDGE Comparing Assistant