Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010121082026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2106/2026 SRI KAILASH BASUMATARY S/O SRI MANIK BASUMATARY, R/O VILLAGE NO. 1 GORMARA, P.O. KAJIAMATI, P.S. UDALGURI, DISTRICT UDALGURI, ASSAM, PIN-784509. VERSUS SRI MANIK BASUMATARY AND ANR. S/O LATE ADHAR BASUMATARY, R/O VILLAGE NO. 1 GORMARA, P.O. KAJIAMATI, P.S. UDALGURI, DISTRICT UDALGURI, ASSAM, PIN-784509. 2:UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER TEZPUR BRANCH NEAR POLICE STATION FLOOR NO. 1 M.C. ROAD TEZPUR, DISTRICT SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-78400 Advocate for the Petitioner : S I AKAND, MR. R Deka Advocate for the Respondent : KAUSHIK JAIN(R1), BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 21.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. R. Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. K. Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1. 2. On perusal of the office note dated 18.08.2026, it appears that notice issued to opposite party No. 2 has been received by an employee of the Page No.# 2/2 opposite party No. 2/Insurance Company. Hence, the notice to the said opposite party is held to be duly served. 3. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 85 days in preferring the connected MAC appeal wherein the judgment and order dated 10.12.2025, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, FTC, Darrang, in MAC (I) Case No. 92/2018 has been impugned. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the ground for delay has been stated in paragraph No. 3 of the instant interlocutory application. 5. On the other hand, Mr. K. Jain, the learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1 has raised no objection against the prayer for condoning the delay. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the materials available on record. 7. After considering the grounds stated in paragraph No. 3 of the interlocutory application, this Court is opinion that same may be regarded as sufficient cause which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, as such, the delay of 85 days in preferring the connected MAC appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application is allowed. 8. The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC appeal and list the same for admission after a week on a date to be fixed by it. JUDGE Comparing Assistant