Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010145512025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2554/2025 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING IT REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE T 24 WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI 600014 AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT CHIBBAR HOUSE, 1ST FLOOR, G.S. ROAD, NEAR DISPUR, P.O. GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (M), PIN 781005 REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER, GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE VERSUS ANIMA KHATUN AND 6 ORS W/O LATE HUNTI AHMED @ KHONTI 2:MD. RAJIB AHMED S/O LATE HUNTI AHMED @ KHONTI BOTH R/O VILL. NO. 3 BILOTIA P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN 782123 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NELLIE P.S. JAGIROAD DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 782410 3:RISHAB PHUKAN S/O JITEN PHUKAN CARE OF RAHUL HOUSE NO. 421 KHEPINDAL Page No.# 2/6 BHETKUCHI P.S. SAWKUCHI GARCHUK DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN 781035 4:NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER 5TH FLOOR OF STAR CITY COMPLEX NEAR HANUMAN MANDIR LACHIT NAGAR GUWAHATI KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN 781007 5:BASANTA KUMAR RAZAK S/O LATE SACHU RAZAK R/O GROUND FLOOR 9TH MILE AMERIGOG HASTINAPUR KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI PIN 781023 6:RAJEN DUTTA S/O SRI PARAS DUTTA R/O VILL. 2 NO DHAMAN P.S. TINGKHONG DIST. DIBRUGARH ASSAM PIN 786150 7:DIPAK SINGHA S/O SURA CHANDRA SINGHA R/O PACHIM BALUHANDAR P.S. LANKA DIST. HOJAI ASSAM PIN 78244 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR T KALITA, MR. A KAKATI Advocate for the Respondent : B SARMA (R-1,2), A BIYANI (R-4),MR. A SAIKIA(R-4),R JAMAN (R-5,7),MR. M TALUKDAR (R-1,2) Page No.# 3/6 Linked Case : RP(FAM.CT.)/0/0 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD GUWAHATI VERSUS ANIMA KHATUN AND ORS MORIGAON ------------ Advocate for : Tridib Kalita Advocate for : appearing for ANIMA KHATUN AND ORS Linked Case : C.APPLN/0/0 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD GUWAHATI VERSUS ANIMA KHATUN AND ORS MORIGAON ------------ Advocate for : Tridib Kalita Advocate for : appearing for ANIMA KHATUN AND ORS Page No.# 4/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 01.04.2026 1. Heard Mr. A. Kakati, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. M. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2/claimants. 2. Though, the respondent No.4 has filed written objection, however, the counsel for the respondent No.4 was not found on call. 3. Since the claimant i.e., the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have not opposed the prayer for condonation of delay, hence the notice to the respondent No.6, who is the driver of the bus, which is insured by the present appellant, is waived. 4. This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited praying for condonation of delay of 108 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal impugning the judgment and award dated 12.11.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morigaon in MAC (D) Case No. 74/2019, whereby the present applicant was directed to pay a compensation amount of Rs.24,83,000/- with an interest @ 6% to the claimant/respondent. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the reasons for delay in filing the connected appeal has been explained by the applicant in paragraph Nos. 3 to 8 of the instant Interlocutory Page No.# 5/6 Application. 6. The main reason cited therein is that the delay has been caused in taking administrative approval of various authorities before filing the connected appeal. 7. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides. The claimant/respondent has not opposed the prayer for condoning the delay. 8. Though, the respondent No. 4 in its written objection has opposed the condonation of delay on the ground that the reasons, which are purely administrative in nature cannot be regarded as sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and it is also stated therein that there some unexplained time gaps in filing the connected appeal by the appellant, which reflects lack of due diligence and casual approach adopted by the applicant in filing the connected appeal as well as the instant Interlocutory Application. 9. It is well stated that while considering an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 a justice oriented approach has to be taken by this Court. 10. In this case, it is not the case that the delay has not been properly explained. The applicant has cited the reasons of delay in obtaining necessary administrative approvals before filing the connected appeal, as the cause of the delay in the instant case. 11. By taking a liberal approach in the matter, and more so, in view of the fact that the claimant/respondent has not opposed the prayer for Page No.# 6/6 condemnation of the delay. 12. This Court is of the considered opinion that the reasons cited for delay in filing the connected appeal in paragraph Nos.3 to 8 of the instant Interlocutory Application will be regarded as sufficient cause, which prevented the applicant in approaching this Court for filing the connected MAC Appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. 13. Accordingly, the delay of 108 days in filing the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this Interlocutory Application is allowed. 14. The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list the same for admission after a week on a date to be fixed by it. 15. The name of Mr. M. Talukdar may be reflected in the cause list as engaged counsel of the claimant/respondent. JUDGE Comparing Assistant