Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010166302026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3193/2026 BASER ALI AND 2 ORS. S/O- LT. SEKENDAR, RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI, P.S.- KHARUPETIA, P.S.- MANGALDAI, DIST- DARRANG, ASSAM 2: MASEDA KAHATUN D/O BASER ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI P.S.- KHARUPETIA P.S.- MANGALDAI DIST- DARRANG ASSAM 3: MAJEDA BEGUM D/O BASER ALI W/O ABUCHAMA ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI P.S.- KHARUPETIA P.S.- MANGALDAI DIST- DARRANG ASSA VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER, WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M AHMED, MR A. ALI,N. CHOUDHURY,A. K. KANU Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. C K S BARUAH(C.G.C.) Page No.# 2/4 Linked Case : MACApp./0/0 BASER ALI S/O- LATE. SEKENDAR 2: MASEDA KHATUN D/O- BASER ALI 3: MAJEDA BEGUM D/O- BASER ALI W/O- ABUCHAMA ALI ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL- GHENAMARI P.SKHARUPETIA DIST- DARRANG ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY. ------------ Advocate for : MUZAMIL AHMED Advocate for : appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 07.10.2026 Page No.# 3/4 1. Heard Mr. M Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants. None has appeared for the opposite parties, though the name of Central Government Counsel Mr. CKS Baruah has been shown as engaged counsel for the opposite parties. 2. Since none has appeared, this court intends to proceed with the case against the opposite parties. 3. This application has been filed by the petitioners, Baser Ali, Maseda Khatun and Majeda Begum under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 31 days in filing the connected MFA, wherein the judgment dated 29.04.2026 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in OA IIu-55/2025 is impugned. 4. The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the reason for delay has been stated in paragraph No. 3 of the instant interlocutory application. 5. I have gone through the grounds stated in the instant application as well as considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the applilcants. 6. Upon considering the ground stated in paragraph No. 3 of the instant application, this court is of the opinion that the present applicants are prevented by sufficient cause in filing the connected MFA within the prescribed period of limitation. As such, the delay of 31 days in filing the connected MFA is hereby condoned and the present interlocutory application stands allowed. 7. The Registry is directed to register the connected MFA and list the same Page No.# 4/4 for admission after a week on a date to be fixed by the Registry. JUDGE Comparing Assistant