Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010143492025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3512/2025 SUNESWAR DAS SON OF- BABAI DAS, R/O-BHITOR KAKILA, P. O. -NEMATI GHAT, P. S. -JORHAT, DISTRICT-JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785111 VERSUS DIPALI @ MAINA DAS AND 5 ORS W/O-LATE PINKU @ PARTHA DAS, 2:HIRANMANI DAS M/O. LT. PINKU @ PARTHA DAS 3:KRISHNA DAS D/O. LT. PINKU @ PARTHA DAS ALL ARE R/O. VILL-GORIABHANGA GAON P. O. AND P. S. -NEMATI DISTRICT-JORHAT ASSAM-785111 4:SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COM. LTD. G.S ROAD GUWAHATI 5:JITU SONOWAL S/O. SONA SONOWAL R/O. SONOWAL KACHARI GAON P/S. JENGRAIMUKH DIST. MAJULI ASSAM PIN-785104 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A SARANIA, MR. M SARANIA,MR R.BEZBARUAH,MR. P P GOGOI Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : B R DAS (R-1,2,3), B DUTTA(R5),MR. U DUTTA(R5) Linked Case : RP(FAM.CT.)/0/0 SOMESWAR DAS SON OF- BABAI DAS R/O-BHITOR KAKILA P. O. -NEMATI GHAT P. S. -JORHAT DISTRICT-JORHAT ASSAM PIN-785111 VERSUS SMTI DIPALI ALIAS MAINA DAS AND 5ORS W/O-LATE PINKU ALIAS PARTHA DAS VILL-GORIABHANGA GAON P. O. AND P. S. -NEMATI DISTRICT-JORHAT ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : Accaito Sarania Advocate for : appearing for SMTI DIPALI ALIAS MAINA DAS AND 5ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 29.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. A. Sarania, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. B.R. Das, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Mr. B. Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent No.6. 2. It appears from the Office Note dated 20.07.2026 that Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have filed their Vakalatnama. It also appears from the said Office Note Page No.# 3/3 that the notices issued to Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have been returned after due service. 3. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 by the applicant, namely, Sri Suneswar Das seeking condonation of delay of 75 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the reasons for the delay have been stated in paragraph No. 3 of the I.A. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents have not opposed the prayer for condonation of delay. 6. I have perused the reasons stated in the instant I.A. and upon consideration thereof, I am satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown which prevented the applicant from preferring the connected MAC Appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Accordingly, the delay of 75 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal is hereby condoned. 7. The I.A. stands allowed. 8. Let the connected MAC Appeal be registered and listed under the admission column after 1 week on a date to be fixed by the Registry. 9. The name of Mr. M. Sarania, learned counsel be reflected in the cause list as the engaged counsel for the appellant in the MAC Appeal henceforth. JUDGE Comparing Assistant