Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010264242025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3933/2025 HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED HUDCO A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION REGD UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT HUDCO BHAWAN, INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI- 110003 AND HAVING ITS GUWAHATI ZONAL OFFICE AT HOUSEFED COMPLEX, RUKIMINI GAON, G S ROAD, GUWAHATI- 781022 AND REP. BY THE REGIONAL CHIEF HUDCO, GUWAHATI VERSUS ON THE DEATH OF RESPONDENT NO 4 SRI ARUN BORAH HIS HEIRS AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES NAMELY AMIT BORAH SON OF LATE ARUN BORAH RESIDENT OF BAROWARY GUWAHATI DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G BHARADWAJ, ABBASH U AHMED,MR. K BHATTACHARJEE,MR.A C SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : MR P K KALITA, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 25.02.2026 Heard Mr. K. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. K.R. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. Other respondents have been Page No.# 2/2 duly served but none appears. This I.A. has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condoning the delay of 456 days in preferring the application for substitution of the legal heirs of the deceased/ respondent No. 4, late Arun Borah as well as for setting aside of abatement of the connected petition being CRP (I.O) No. 322/2017. Perused the causes shown in the delay petition in preferring the substitution petition which are supported by an affidavit. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 does not have any objection to the condonation of delay. Having regard to the statement made in the instant application, I am of the view that the applicant was prevented by sufficient causes in approaching the Court within the period of limitation in filing the application for substitution and setting aside of the abatement. Accordingly, the delay of 456 days is allowed. The I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant