Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010243402025 2026:GAU-AS:5659 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3492/2025 AZARUDDIN AHMED SON OF MD. BAHARUDDIN AHMED, R/O SARUPATHAR TOWN, WARD NO. 06, MOUZA- SARUPATHAR, P.O. AND P.S.- SARUPATHAR, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785601 VERSUS MD MOKIBUL AHMED SON OF LATE ANUWAR AHMED, R/O KHONIKAR , WARD NO 05, P.O. AND P.S.- SARUPATHAR, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785601 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S S RAHMAN, MS B H SHIRIN,MR. M R SODIAL,MR. S S A RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR F U BARBHUIYA,MS S DAS Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 24.04.2026 Heard Mr. S.S.A. Rahman, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. S. Das, learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. This application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is preferred by the applicant for condoning the delay of 7 days in preferring the connected revision petition under Section 104 of the CPC, read with Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the CPC. 3. Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the applicant submits that on account of his fault, which is a bona fide one, the connected revision petition could not be filed in time and the same has been explained in paragraph No. 3 of the additional affidavit filed by the applicant, and under such circumstances, he has contended to allow this application. 4. On other hand, Ms. Das, learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the application on the ground that the delay has not properly been explained. 5. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the application and the documents placed on record, and also perused the additional affidavit dated 21.04.2026, filed by the applicant. 6. It appears that on account of mistake on the part of the engaged counsel, the connected revision petition could not be filed in time and the same appears to be a bona fide one. In that view of the matter, the delay of 7 days in filing the connected revision petition appears to be sufficiently explained and as such, Page No.# 3/3 this Court is inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, the delay of 7 days in preferring the connected revision petition stands condoned. 8. In terms of above, this I.A. stands disposed of. 9. In view of the order passed in this I.A., now the Registry shall proceed to register the connected revision petition and thereafter, list the same before this Court as soon as practicable. JUDGE Comparing Assistant