Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17258 (GAU)

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD v. SMTI CHANDRA PROVA SAIKIA ALIAS CHANDRAPROBHA BORAH AND 2 ORS

I.A.(Civil)/25/2026 · 2026-01-08

Mitali Thakuria

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010239422025 2026:GAU-AS:394 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/25/2026 in MAC APP No. 13611/2025 Filing Number with I.A.(C) No. 13741/2025 Filing Number THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI-7 VERSUS SMTI CHANDRA PROVA SAIKIA ALIAS CHANDRAPROBHA BORAH AND 2 ORS W/O- LATE RAJENDRA KR BORAH, R/O- VILLAGE- PANICHOKUA, P.O.- PANICHOKUA, P.S.-PULIBOR, DISTRICT- JORHAT, ASSAM. PIN- 785006 2:SRI BIPIN DUTTA S/O- SRI MONURAM DUTTA R/O- DERGAON FETACRA P.O- DERGAON DISTRICT- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785614 OWNER OF THE BAJAJ KTM DUKE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AS-03-V-4561 3:SRI DEBOJIT BOARH S/O- SRI NOGEN BORAH R/O- VILLAGE PACHANI BARAGAON P.S.-DERGAON DISTRICT- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785614 (DRIVER OF THE BAJAJ KTM DUKE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AS-03-V-4561 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GOSWAMI, MR. R SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. P GOGOI, FOR CAVEATOR Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. R. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. P. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. H. Das, learned for the claimant/respondent No.1. 2. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of delay of 27 days in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment and award dated 26.06.2025, passed by the learned Member, MACT No.2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in MAC Case No. 2054/2020. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Sharma, learned counsel that for observing the official formalities there was a delay of 27 days in preferring the appeal. However, there is no laches or negligence on the part of the applicant/appellant in preferring the appeal with a delay of 27 days. 4. Mr. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 raised no objection and submitted that he has no objection if the delay is condoned and the matter is registered. 5. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for both sides and also considering the grounds mentioned in the application, the delay of 27 days Page No.# 3/3 in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned. 6. This interlocutory application accordingly stands disposed of. 7. Registry is directed to register and number the connected appeal and to list the appeal, on a date to be fixed by it. JUDGE Comparing Assistant