UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD v. SATISH KAIBORTA AND ORS
I.A.(Civil)/2146/2025 · 2025-08-19
Budi Habung
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7550 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7550 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010030762025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2146/2025 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT 24, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI. VERSUS SATISH KAIBORTA AND ORS S/O SRI KALO KOYBARTA @ KOLO KOIBARTA, VILL.- NAHIRA KULDUNG, P.O.- NAHIRA, P.S.- PALASHBARI, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN- 781132.
2:ON THE DEATH OF SRI PARESH KAIBORTA HIS LEGAL HEIRS 2.1:MANOJ KAIBARTA SON
RESIDENT OF VILL.- NAHIRA KULDUNG P.O.- NAHIRA P.S.- PALASHBARI DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781132.
2.2:SAKTI KAIBARTA SON
RESIDENT OF VILL.- NAHIRA KULDUNG P.O.- NAHIRA P.S.- PALASHBARI DIST.- KAMRUP
Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM PIN- 781132.
3:SRI APURBA KALITA S/O SRI TARUN KALITA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARTEZPUR PS PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM 781128 4:SRI BINANDA NATH S/O LATE RAM NATH
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KAMALPUR PS KAMALPUR DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM 78135 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI, MS. P BORTHAKUR,MS. M SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. H GOGOI,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 20.08.2025 Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant and also heard Ms. P. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. It is submitted that during the pendency of the instant appeal, the respondent No.2, passed away on 23.04.2023, leaving behind his legal heirs/representatives. By filing this application, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 512 days in filing the substitution petition. Ms. Kalita learned counsel for the respondent No.1, has no objection in
Page No.# 3/3 condoning the delay of 512 days. The applicant has also explained the ground for delay in filing the substitution petition in paragraph Nos. 3 & 4. On perusal of the averment made in the said paragraphs, this Court is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by a sufficient cause in preferring the connected application in time. In view of the above, the delay of 512 days in filing the substitution petition is allowed. With the above the I.A. Stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant