Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010047472025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/800/2025 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI -7. VERSUS PRANITA BORO D/O. LATE HAREN BORO 2:THANESWAR BORO S/O. LATE HAREN BORO 3:RAJIB BORO S/O. LATE HAREN BORO 4:NABIN BORO S/O. LATE HAREN BORO ALL ARE R/O. VILL.- RANI ANDHERIJULI P/O. RANI P/S. PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM-781131 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ACHARYA, MRS B ACHARYA Advocate for the Respondent : MR D MONDAL (R-1 TO 4), Linked Case : RP(FAM.CT.)/0/0 Page No.# 2/4 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI 7. VERSUS SMT PRANITA BORO D/O LATE HAREN BORO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANI ANDHERIJULI P.O RANI P.S PALASHBARI DISTRICT KAMRUP ASSAM-781131 ------------ Advocate for : AYUSMAN ACHARYA Advocate for : appearing for SMT PRANITA BORO Linked Case : C.APPLN/0/0 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI -7. VERSUS SMT PRANITA BORO D/O LATE HAREN BORO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANI ANDHERIJULI P.O RANI P.S PALASHBARI DISTRICT KAMRUP ASSAM-781131 ------------ Advocate for : AYUSMAN ACHARYA Advocate for : appearing for SMT PRANITA BORO Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date - 27.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. A. Acharya, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. D. Mondal, the learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 1 to 4. 2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the applicant-Insurance Company, praying for condonation of delay of 31 days in preferring the connected appeal, wherein the judgment and order dated 29.10.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 3, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati in MAC Appeal No. 187/2018 has been impugned. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has stated the reasons for delay in preferring the connected appeal in paragraph Nos. 3 to 8 of the instant Interlocutory Application. 4. The learned counsel for the opposite parties submitted that considering the grounds stated by the applicant as well as considering the short period of delay of 31 days, the opposite party do not have any objection if the prayer for condoning the delay is allowed. 5. I have gone through the grounds stated in the instant Interlocutory Application. Page No.# 4/4 6. Considering the grounds stated therein to be sufficient cause, which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. The delay of 31 days in the connected appeal is hereby, condoned and this Interlocutory Application is, allowed. 7. The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list the same for admission after one week on a date to be fixed by it. 8. The name of Mr. D. Mondal may be reflected as counsel for the opposite party Nos. 1 to 4 in the cause list, henceforth. JUDGE Comparing Assistant