Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010022592025 2026:GAU-AS:7487 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/430/2025 HELENA SAIKIA AND ORS W/O- LT MASLEM ALI AHMED, R/O- VILL- BARSARKUCHI, MOUZA- BATAHGILA, P.S. NALBARI, DIST-NALBARI, ASSAM 2: SAFIKUL ISLAM S/O- LT MASLEM ALI AHMED R/O- VILL- BARSARKUCHI MOUZA- BATAHGILA P.S. NALBARI DIST-NALBARI ASSAM 3: SABINA YASMIN D/O- LT MASLEM ALI AHMED R/O- VILL- BARSARKUCHI MOUZA- BATAHGILA P.S. NALBARI DIST-NALBARI ASSAM 4: MISS SAJINA PARBIN D/O- LT MASLEM ALI AHMED R/O- VILL- BARSARKUCHI MOUZA- BATAHGILA P.S. NALBARI DIST-NALBARI ASSAM VERSUS SIKHA BARUAH AND ORS W/O LATE BIRAJ MALLA BARUAH, R/O MILANPUR IN FRONT OF NO. 1 MASZID, P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAM, GUWAHATI-21, DIST. KAMRUP M, ASSAM. Page No.# 2/4 2:RISHIRAJ BARUAH S/O LATE BIRAJ MALLA BARUAH R/O MILANPUR IN FRONT OF NO. 1 MASZID P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. 3:BIPLAB BARUAH S/O LATE BIRAJ MALLA BARUAH R/O MILANPUR IN FRONT OF NO. 1 MASZID P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. 4:DEEKSHA BARUAH S/O LATE BIRAJ MALLA BARUAH R/O MILANPUR IN FRONT OF NO. 1 MASZID P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : NURUL ALOM, MD R ISLAM,N ALOM Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S BORTHAKUR, Linked Case : RSA/242/2013 HELENA SAIKIA and 3 ORS. W/O LATE MASLEM ALI AHMED 2: MD. SAFIKUL ISLAM S/O LATE MASLEM ALI AHMED 3: MISS SABINA YASMIN D/O LATE MASLEM ALI AHMED 4: MISS SAJINA PARBIN D/O LATE MASLEM ALI AHMED Page No.# 3/4 ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL. BARSARKUCHI MOUZA BATAHGILA P.S. and DIST. NALBARI ASSAM. VERSUS BIRAJ MALLA BARUAH S/O LATE DHARMA MALLA BARUAH R/O MILANPUR IN FRONT OF NO. 1 MASZID P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MS.M DAS Advocate for : MR.B C DAS appearing for BIRAJ MALLA BARUAH BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA ORDER Date : 27.05.2026 Heard Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. By filing this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the applicants who are the appellants in the connected appeal prayed for condoning the delay of 198 (One hundred and ninety eight) days beyond the period of limitation in filing a substitution petition on account of death of sole respondent namely, Biraj Malla Baruah. 3. Notice on the legal representatives of the deceased respondent was served by usual process and as per process server’s report available on record notices on respondent nos. 1(a) to 1(b) was received by the respondent no. 1(a). Accordingly, the notice is deemed to be duly served. Page No.# 4/4 4. None appears on call for the said respondents. 5. It is projected that the death of the respondents came to notice of the appellant only on 26.11.2024 and the same was informed to the Court and accordingly, it took some time to present this application. 6. Considering the fact that respondents were the persons sought to be substituted are not present though notice is duly served, the explanation is held that as good and sufficient cause which prevented the applicant to file the application for substitution within time. 7. Accordingly, the prayer is allowed and delay of 198 (One hundred and ninety eight) days beyond the period of limitation in presenting the said two applications is hereby condoned. 8. Accordingly, the interlocutory stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant