Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010118862026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2127/2026 HARE KRISHNA HAZARIKA SON OF LATE MUKHESWAR HAZARIKA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HARIGAON, MOUZA- HALESWAR, P.O.- NIKAMUL, DISTRICT- SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN-784001 VERSUS SMTI. BEENA SINGH CHOUHAN DAS AND 8 ORS. WIFE OF LATE DAYAL CH. DAS @ DAYANANDA DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAJGAON, NEAR LAHKAR ENTERPRISE, MOUZA- BHAIRABPAD, P.O.- NIKAMUL, DISTRICT- SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN- 784001. 2:SMTI TARULATA GOGOI WIFE OF LATE NANDARAM GOGOI RESIDENT OF MORABHARALIPAR MAZGAON P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT-SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001. 3:SMTI MANTU DAS HAZARIKA WIFE OF HARE KRISHNA HAZARIKA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HARIGAON MOUZA- HALESWAR P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT-SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 4:SMTI RUPA DAS WIFE OF NIKUNJA KALITA Page No.# 2/3 RESIDENT OF NIKAMUL SATRA P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001. 5:SMTI GUNALATA DAS HAZARIKA WIFE OF BALU BHADRA HAZARIKA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-THULA TIKA GAON P.O.- GAMIRIPAL DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784180. 6:LAKHI DAS SON OF DEBEN DAS RESIDENT OF MORABHARALIPAR MAZGAON P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001. 7:SMTI KAMALA DAS BORA WIFE OF MAHESH BORA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HARIGAON MOUZA- HALESWAR P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 8:RUDRA DAS SON OF LATE DAYAL CH. DAS @ DAYANANDA DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAJGAON NEAR LAHKAR ENTERPRISE MOUZA- BHAIRABPAD P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001. 9:SMTI. QUEEN DAS DAUGHTER OF LATE DAYAL CH. DAS @ DAYANANDA DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAJGAON NEAR LAHKAR ENTERPRISE MOUZA- BHAIRABPAD P.O.- NIKAMUL DISTRICT- SONITPUR Page No.# 3/3 ASSAM PIN- 784001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D CHOUDHURY, MR. R K SARMA,MS. A KHARBANI,MR J DAS,MR T CHAKRABORTY Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 28.08.2026 Heard Ms. A Kharbani, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 40 days in preferring the connected appeal. The delay has been satisfactorily explained. This Court is of the opinion that going for issuing notice to the respondents would be nothing but sheer waste of time. Therefore, the delay is condoned. The connected appeal shall be registered and listed for admission hearing. The interlocutory application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant