Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14970 (GAU)

INDUSIND GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMTI LILI DAS AND ANR.

I.A.(Civil)/2758/2026 · 2026-09-22

Yarenjungla Longkumer

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010166822026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2758/2026 INDUSIND GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 19, RELIANCE CENTRE, WALCHAND HIRACHAND MARG, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI 400001 AND CORPORATE OFFICE AT 570, RECTIFIER HOUSE, NAGAUM CROSS, NEXT TO ROYAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, WADALA (W), MUMBAI 400031 AND ONE OF THE BRANCH OFFICE AT PRAG PLAZA, 5TH FLOOR G.S ROAD, BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI-781005 VERSUS SMTI LILI DAS AND ANR. WIFE OF SRI BASANTA DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - TUMUKI, P.S. - TEZPUR, DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM, PIN-784153 2:SRI DHANMONI BORA SON OF HIRANYA BORA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - TUMUKI P.O. PITHAKHOWA P.S. - TEZPUR DISTRICT- ASSAM PIN-784153 OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE NO.AS-02/AG-061 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A J SAIKIA, MR. S PEGU,M CHETIA Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER 23.09 . 2026 Learned counsel Mr. A.J. Saikia, is present for the applicant. None appears for the respondents, when the matter is called. 2. The office note dated 18.09.2026 indicates that the notice on respondent No. 1 and 2 has been delivered on 17.09.2026. 3. In view of the said note, the notice on respondent No. 1 and 2 is deemed to be complete. 4. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, has been preferred by the applicant praying for condonation of delay of 60 days in preferring the accompanying MAC Appeal against the judgment and order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the learned Member, MACT Sonitpur, Tezpur, Assam in MAC Case No. 25 of 2024 (Death). 5. This Court has perused the pleadings and it is found that the reasons for the delay has been set out at paragraphs 3 and 4 of the application. 6. The Court has gone through the same and find that sufficient cause has been shown by the applicant to explain the delay of 60 days in filing the accompanying appeal. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. The delay of 60 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 9. The petition stands disposed of. 10. The Registry shall register the main MAC Appeal and list the same for Page No.# 3/3 admission after one week. JUDGE Comparing Assistant