Page No.# 1/2 GAHC040004082025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/76/2025 HDFC Ergo Gen Ins Co Ltd having tis registered office and Head Office at Ramon House, HT Parekh Marg, 169, Backbay Reclamation, Mumbai 400020 and its Guwahati Branch Office at Adityam Building, 6th Floor, Lachit Nagar, GS Road, Guwahati, Assam 781007 VERSUS Mrs Pema Yangzom Namsa Wife of Late Pema Wangdi Youbi, resident of Boha Village, PS Kalaktang, West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. Advocate for the Petitioner : Gedo Kato, Advocate for the Respondent : Bolu Ram Das, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 12-06-202 Heard Mr. G. Kato ,learned counsel for the applicant, Insurance Company. Also heard Ms. D. Rillung, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/claimant. This is an application filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 61 days in filing the connected appeal against Page No.# 2/2 the judgment and award dated 16.10.2024 passed by the learned Member,MACT Bomdilla in MACT Case No.16/2022. The ground for delay in preferring the connected appeal has been explained in paragraph 6 of the application, inter alia stating that the appellant being a private sector general Insurance Company Limited, required to act strictly as per the laid down procedure and as such, the files were routed from one office to another from its branch office Guwahati to main office at Mumbai, and again from Mumbai to Guwahati, and thereafter to the counsel and in the process, there has been delay of 61 days in preferring the connected appeal. It is submitted that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate. The respondent/claimant raised objection by filing affidavit-in- opposition stating that the day to day delay has not been properly explained. Having heard both the learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of the explanation given in the condonation petition, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause for not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time. In view of above, the delay of 61 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned. I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant