Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010288292025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/44/2026 SMTI BHANU SAIKIA BORAH AND ANR WIFE OF LATE NETRA BORAH 2: SRI BHASKAR BORAH S/O LATE NETRA BORAH BOTH ARE R/O VILL. KETEKIBARI P.O. KETEKIBARI P.S. TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM VERSUS SRI ANJAN GOSWAMI AND ANR SON OF SRI NIRANJAN GOSWAMI, VILLAGE GAHAN NAGAR, MAZGAON, PO. TEZPUR, PS. TEZPUR, DISTRICT SONITPUR, ASSAM, 784001 2:DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY TEZPUR BRANCH SONITPUR ASSAM 78400 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BHATTACHARJEE, ABBASH U AHMED,MS. P BORDOLOI,MR. A U AHMED,S KHAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR B DEORI(R1), MR. SHYAM SHARMA(R2),MS L SHARMA(R2),MR A KHANIKAR(R1) In MACApp. Case No. 16740/2025 WITH MACApp. Case No. 16740/2025(filing number) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 25.03.2026 [1] Heard Ms. A. Barman, the learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Ms. L. Sharma, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. [2] This interlocutory application has been preferred by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 71 days in preferring the connected appeal, wherein, the judgment dated 07.07.2025, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur in MACT Case No. 33/2024 (Death)has been impugned. [3] The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have explained the reasons for delay in approaching this court in paragraph No. 3 of the instant interlocutory application. [4] On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that considering the grounds taken by the applicants in the interlocutory application, she does not have any objection if the delay of 71 days is condoned. [5] After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as going through the grounds stated in the paragraph No. 3 of the instant application, this court is of the Page No.# 3/3 considered opinion that the reasons stated in the instant application for approaching this court beyond the prescribed period of limitation may be regarded as sufficient cause, which prevented the applicants from approaching the court by filing the connected appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. [6] Accordingly, the delay of 71 days in filing the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application is allowed. [7] The Registry is directed to register the connected appeal and list the same in admission column after a week, on a date to be fixed by it. JUDGE Comparing Assistant