Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010067952026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1154/2026 NAZIMUDDIN SARKAR S/O. HAKIMUDDIN SARKAR, RO VILL KHANABARI, PONENAYANI, PS GAURIPUR, DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN 783349 VERSUS TAPASH CH. SAHA @ TAPASH KR. SAHA AND 2 ORS. S/O. LATE NAGENDRA MOHAN SAHA, RO WARD NO 2, GAURIPUR, P/O. AND P/S. GAURIPUR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783331 2:LALIT CH MALI SO MANMOHAN MALI RO VILL BAROMERA PO AND PS AGOMONI DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783335 3:THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR STAR CITY COMPLEX ULUBARI LACHIT NAGAR GHY 78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M TALUKDAR, B SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A ACHARYA(R3), Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 19.08.2026 1. Heard Ms. S. Patwari, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. S. Sarma, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 3. 2. On perusal of office note dated 18.08.2026, it appears that notice issued to respondent No. 2 has been delivered to him on 12.06.2026, whereas, notice issued to respondent No. 1 was refused to be accepted by respondent No. 1 on 11.06.2026. As such, the notices issued to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are held to be duly served. 3. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant/claimant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 72 days in filing the connected appeal. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the reasons for delay in preferring the connected appeal by the present applicant has been stated in paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the instant interlocutory application. 5. The learned counsel for respondent No. 3, considering the reasons stated in the instant interlocutory application, has not opposed the prayer for condonation of delay. 6. I have gone through the grounds stated in the interlocutory application as well as considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides. 7. The reasons stated in paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the instant interlocutory application appear to be sufficient reasons which prevented the Page No.# 3/3 applicant in preferring the connected appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. 8. As such, the delay of 72 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application is allowed. 9. The Registry is directed to register the connected appeal and list the same for admission after a week on a date to be fixed by it. JUDGE Comparing Assistant