Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010033352026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/734/2026 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 24, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600014 AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI-5, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER. VERSUS SMTI. RITA BORO AND 3 ORS. W/O SANJOY RABHA, VILL.- KATHALKUCHI, P.O.- SINGRA, P.S.- BOKO, DISTRICT- KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781135. 2:SMTI MAHIMA BORO W/O SRI LAKHAN BORO VILL.- MIRZAGHAT (BAGHPARA) P.O.-BONDAPARA P.S.-BOKO DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781135 3:MUNINDRA BORO S/O LATE SABIN BORO VILL.- BHOGDABARI P.O.- BOKO P.S.- BOKO DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781123 4:PURNA DAS S/O ATUL DAS VILLAGE- KATAHBARI (BARKHAL) P.O.- SANTIPUR Page No.# 2/4 P.S- BOKO DISTRICT - KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-78114 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SISHIR DUTTA, S K BEGUM,MS. M CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : MR R CHAKRAVORTY(R4), MR. P SARMAH(R4),R BASUMATARY(R4) In MAC App. Case No. 1865/2026 With MAC App. Case No. 1865/2026 (filing number) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 11.05.2026 [1] Heard Ms. M. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A.K. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as well as Mr. R. Chakraborty, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. [2] On perusal of the Office Note dated 06.05.2026, it appears that the AD Card sent along with the notice issued to respondent No. 3 has returned with signature of one Sabita Boro thereon. [3] The notice issued to respondent No. 3 is also held to be duly served. Page No.# 3/4 [4] This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been preferred by the applicant, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. for condonation of delay of 12 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal. [5] Now the appellant has impugned the judgment dated 06.11.2025, passed by the MACT Bongaigaon in MAC Case No. 320/2019. [6] The cause of delay has been stated by the applicant in paragraph No. 4 of the instant interlocutory application. [7] The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and 4 have not objected to the prayer for condonation of delay. [8] After going through the grounds stated in the paragraph No. 4 of the instant interlocutory application, this court is of the opinion that the said grounds may be regarded as sufficient cause, which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected MAC Appeal within prescribed period of limitation. [9] Accordingly, the delay of 12 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application, is disposed of. [10] The Registry is directed to register the connected MACAppeal and list the same for admission on 26th May, 2026. [11] The name of learned counsel for the Page No.# 4/4 respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 be reflected in the cause list henceforth. JUDGE Comparing Assistant