Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010128682026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2412/2026 UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110011. 2: THE DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER GUWAHATI CIRCLE OFFICE OF THE DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER GUWAHATI-781027 3: THE DIRECTOR GENERAL DEFENCE ESTATES RAKSHA SAMPADA BHAWAN ULAAN BAATAR MARG NEW DELHI - 110010 VERSUS THE SONAPUR TEA COMPANY PVT. LTD. AND ANR. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE IN KOLKATA AND ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AT SONAPUR, MOUZA-PANBARI, UNDER SONAPUR REVENUE CIRCLE, DISTRICT- KAMRUP METROPOLITAN, ASSAM. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP M LAND ACQUISITION BRANCH GUWAHATI ASSAM-78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H GUPTA, Advocate for the Respondent : MR A CHOWDHURY, FOR CAVEATOR,S HAZARIKA,N DEVNATH,L DAS Page No.# 2/4 Linked Case : WP/0/0 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENCE SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI - 110011. 2: THE DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER GUWAHATI CIRCLE OFFICE OF THE DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER GUWAHATI781027 3: THE DIRECTOR GENERAL DEFENCE ESTATES RAKSHA SAMPADA BHAWAN ULAAN BAATAR MARG NEW DELHI - 110010 VERSUS THE SONAPUR TEA COMPANY PVT LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE IN KOLKATA AND ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AT SONAPUR MOUZA-PANBARI UNDER SONAPUR REVENUE CIRCLE DISTRICTKAMRUP METROPOLITAN ASSAM. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP M LAND ACQUISITION BRANCH GUWAHATI ASSAM-781001 ------------ Advocate for : HAREESH GUPTA Advocate for : appearing for THE SONAPUR TEA COMPANY PVT LTD Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date - 27.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. H. Gupta, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the caveator/respondent No. 1 as well as Ms. D. D. Barman, the learned Additional Senior Government counsel for the respondent No. 2. 2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed by the applicant praying for condoning the delay of 31 days in preferring the connected L.A. Appeal wherein the judgment and order dated 03.02.2026 passed by the learned District Judge Kamrup (Metro) in L.A. Reference Case No. 8/2016 has been impugned. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has stated the reasons for delaying filing the connected Appeal in paragraph Nos.3 and 4 of the instant Interlocutory Application. the learned counsel for the respondent, considering the short period of delay, have not raised any objection. 4. I have gone through the reasons stated in the instant Interlocutory Application considering the same to be sufficient cause which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected Land Acquisition Appeal within prescribed period of limitation, the delay of 31 days in preferring the same is hereby, condoned and this Interlocutory Application is allowed. Page No.# 4/4 5. The Registry is directed to register the connected Land Acquisition Appeal and list the same for admission after a week on a date to be fixed by it. The name of Ms. D. D. Barman, the learned Additional Senior Government counsel may be reflected in the cause list, as the engaged counsel for the respondent No. 2, henceforth. JUDGE Comparing Assistant