Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010167672026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3214/2026 REBECA DEORI @ REBECCA DEORI WIFE OF LATE MAHESWAR DEORI, RESIDENT OF RAJDHANI MAZID LANE, P.S- DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS SANAT KR. BHARALI BARUAH AND 5 ORS. S/O LATE CHANDRA KR. BARUAH, RESIDENT OF JAPORIGOG, JAYANTA HAZARIKA PATH, HOUSE NO. 3, P.S.- DISPUR, GUWAHATI, DIST- KAMRUP (M), PIN- 781006 2:MISS SANYUKTA BARUAH D/O SANAT KR. BHARALI BARUAH RESIDENT OF JAPORIGOG JAYANTA HAZARIKA PATH HOUSE NO. 3 P.S.- DISPUR GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) PIN- 781006 3:SHIT ROY SON OF SRI ASHIM ROY R/O VILLAGE- DAKHIN BASISTHA NAGAR HOUSE NO.-17 P.S.-BASISTHA DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN- 781029 4:NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL OFFICE G.S. ROAD BHANGAGARH Page No.# 2/4 GUWAHATI DIST.-KAMRUP (M) PIN- 781005 5:UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC. SAN FRANSISCO CALIFORNIA USA REPRESENTED BY UBER CABS INDIA REGISTERED HEAD OFFICE- REGUS BUSINESS PLATINUM CENTRE PVT. LTD. LEVEL-13 NAVI MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA INDIA PIN- 400705 6:UBER GUWAHATI OFFICE RESHAM NAGAR KHANAPARA P.O.-KHANAPARA GUWAHATI DIST.-KAMRUP (M) PIN- 78102 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYYA, MR N BARMAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S C KEYAL (FOR CAVEATOR), MR. A ACHARYA(R4),MS. M GAZLOO (FOR CAVEATOR),MS D D ROY (FOR CAVEATOR),MS. R HUSSAIN (FOR CAVEATOR),P UPADHAYA (FOR CAVEATOR),KAUSHIK JAIN (FOR CAVEATOR),MS. NITUMA KAKATI (FOR CAVEATOR),M DEKA (FOR CAVEATOR) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 14.10.2026 1. Heard Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A. Acharya, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 4 as well as Mr. P. Jalan, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 5 and 6. 2. None has appeared for the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 though on last occasion, the engaged counsel for the said opposite parties appeared. Page No.# 3/4 3. On perusal of the office note dated 09.10.2026, it appears that the notice could not be served on opposite party No. 5 as no such person was found in the address given. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the opposite party No. 3 is the driver of the offending vehicle and since the notices have been served on all other opposite parties, notice to opposite party No. 5 may be waived. 5. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant/Insurance Company under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, praying for condonation of delay of 51 days in preferring the connected MAC appeal whereBY the judgment and award dated 16.03.2026 passed in MAC Case No. 2717/2017 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 3, Kamrup(M) has been impugned. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the reason for delay has been stated by the applicant in paragraph Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of the instant interlocutory application. 7. The learned counsel for opposite party No. 4 as well as learned counsel for opposite party No. 5 and 6 have not raised any objection against the said prayer. 8. I have gone through the grounds stated by the applicant in the instant interlocutory application. Same, in the considered opinion of this Court, may be considered as sufficient cause which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Page No.# 4/4 9. As such, the delay of 51 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application is allowed. 10. The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC appeal and list the same for admission immediately after Puja vacation on a date to be fixed by it. 11. The name of A. Acharya may be reflected in the cause-list as engaged counsel for respondent No. 4. Similarly name of Mr. P. Jalan may be reflected in the cause-list as engaged counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 henceforth. JUDGE Comparing Assistant