Page No.# 1/5 GAHC030004262025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/105/2025 Sh. B. Dawngzela S/o Lairuala (L), R/o Ramhlun South, Aizawl, Mizoram VERSUS Sh. Abdul Rahim and 3 Ors. S/o Abdul Jalil, R/o H.No.1, Bagirkhala, PO and PS Nilam Bazar, Dist Karimganj, Assam 2:Sh. Lalruatfela 3:UCO Bank 4:Sh. Abhijit Da Advocate for the Petitioner : Lalremruata Chenkual Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. C Malsawmtluanga Linked Case : RFA/26/2025 Sh. B. Dawngzela S/o Lairuala (L) R/o Ramhlun South Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS Page No.# 2/5 Sh. Abdul Rahim and 3 Ors. S/o Abdul Jalil R/o H.No.1 Bagirkhala PO and PS. Nilam Bazar Dist. Karimganj Assam 2:Sh. Lalruatfela S/o Kapliana R/o H.No. 86 Govt. Complex Aizawl Mizoram 3:UCO Bank Represented by the Branch Manager Aizawl Branch Dawrpui Aizawl Mizoram 4:Sh. Abhijit Das Zonal Manager UCO Bank Zonal Office TR Phukhan Road Jorhat Assam Advocate for the Petitioner : Lalremruata Chenkual Advocate for the Respondent : Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/106/2025 Sh. B. Dawngzela S/o Lairuala (L) R/o Ramhlun South Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS Sh. Abdul Rahim and 3 Ors. S/o Abdul Rahim Page No.# 3/5 R/o H.No.1 Bagirkhala PO and PS. Nilam Bazar Dist. Karimganj Assam 2:Sh. Lalruatfela S/o Kapliana R/o H.No. 86 Govt. Complex Aizawl Mizoram 3:UCO Bank Represented by the Branch Manager Aizawl Branch Dawrpui Aizawl Mizoram 4:Sh. Abhijit Das Zonal Manager UCO Bank Zonal Office TR Phukhan Road Jorhat Assam Advocate for the Petitioner : Lalremruata Chenkual Advocate for the Respondent : B E F O R E HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG ORDER 13.02.2026 Heard Mr. Lalremruata Chenkual, learned counsel. Also heard Mr. Zodinpuia Hnamte, learned counsel for the opposite party. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for Page No.# 4/5 condonation of the delay of 18 days in filing an appeal against the impugned Order dated 27.03.2025, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-III, Aizawl District, Mizoram in Civil Suit No. 38/2021. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the reason for the delay of 18 days in filing the connected appeal has been explained at Para 1 (i) to (vi) of the interlocutory application, wherein the reason for the delay is not due to any latches or negligence on the part of the applicant, but the delay was caused due to the time taken to obtain appropriate legal advice and to prepare the appeal memo and the subsequent condonation application. Mr. Zodinpuia Hnamte, learned counsel for the opposite party, in all fairness, submits that considering the less number of days required to be condoned, they do not strongly object to the application for condonation of delay. He however, mentions that the instant Regular First Appeal has no merits and deserves to be dismissed being non-maintainable in its present form and style. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for both the parties, this court has perused the explanation given by the applicant at Para 1 (i) to (vi). Finding that the reason for the delay was not due to any laches or negligence on the part of the applicant and the court is satisfied with the explanation given. Page No.# 5/5 Accordingly, I.A.(Civil) No. 105/2025 stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant