Single bench order condoning a delay of 154 days in filing an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The court found sufficient cause for the delay and listed the connected appeal.
Condonation of delay of 154 days in filing the connected appeal; appeal listed for admission.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010132872017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 2161/2017
1:UNION OF INDIA and 3 ORS, REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION, SANCHAR BHAWAN 20 ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI 110001 OWNER OF VEHICLE NO. AS-01/DC-5902
VERSUS
1:SMTI RASHMI RABHA and 5 ORS, W/O LATE NABA KR. RABHA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.K K PARASAR
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R GOSWAMI
Linked Case : /
1:UNION OF INDIA and 3 ORS
2: AKSHAY KUMAR DAS
SON OF LATE PHANIDHAR DAS VILL- GADHULIGAN GAON DIST. BASKA.
3: RANJIT KUMAR SAIKIA
SON OF LATE GHANAKANTA SAIKIA VILL- TELIAPANI GAON DIST. NAGAON.
Page No.# 2/6
4: MAHENDRA DOLOI
SON OF LATE MANIK CHANDRA DOLOI VILL- NAGAON DIST. DARRANG.
5: LALIT SAIKIA
SON OF LATE DHARMESWAR SAIKIA VILL- DIMURUGURI NAGAON.
6: SRI MOHENDRA MOHAN SARMA
SON OF LATE BRAJA MOHAN SARMA RESIDENT OF BEBEJIA VILL- MAHARIATI NAGAON DIST.NAGAON.
7: DIPAK MAHANATA
SON OF LATE H.R. MAHANTA RESIDENTOF BARKULHATI DIST. NALBARI.
SON OF LATE DIMBESWAR BORA RESIDENT OF VILL- CHARIA DIST. NALBARI ASSAM.
9: MD. MAFIDUL ISLAM SON OF MD. AMANULLA AMINPATTY NAGAON.
10: RATUL SAIKIA
SON OF ATUL CHANDRA SAIKIA VILL- AUNIATE NAGAON.
11: GUNESWAR MUDOI
SON OF LATE SONARAM MUDOI VILL- MUDOIANI DIST.NAGAON.
Page No.# 3/6
VERSUS
1:SMTI RASHMI RABHA and 6 ORS 2:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY PANCHAYAT and RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM. 3:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ASSAM PANJABARI JURIPAR GUWAHATI-37. 4:SRI PRASENJIT DEY SECRETARY DOYARBOND GAON PANCHAYAT BARJALEN ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. DOYARBOND DIST. CACHAR ASSAM. 5:SRI ASUTOSH GUPTA SECRETARY BAJANTIPUR GAON PANCHAYAT UNDER SILCHAR ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. BAJANTIPUR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM. 6:BISWAJIT DAS SON OF BANI MADHAV DAS VILL and P.O. UDORBOND HOSPITAL ROAD P.S. UDORBOND DIST. CACHAR. 7:SAMSUZ ZAMAN LASKAR SON OF FAIZ UDDIN LASKAR VILL- RONGPUR PART- IV P.S. SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM. 8:MIFTAH UDDIN MAJUMDAR SON OF LATE. SAIFUDDIN MAZUMDAR
Page No.# 4/6
VILL- KAPTANPUR PART-18 P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM.
9:DIPANKAR CHAKRABORTY SON OF LATE ASHOU LAL CHAKRABORTY VILL- MALUGRAM BHAIRAV SARANI P.S. SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.K K PARASAR Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 25-11-2019
Heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned CGC for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A. R. Agarwala, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 – 4 and Ms. P. Borthakur, learned counsel for respondent no. 5.
Mr. Parasar, learned CGC has submitted that in compliance with the order dated 23.09.2019, whereby, the applicant was directed to take steps for service of notice on respondent no. 6 in the substituted manner by publication of the notice in a local daily newspaper widely circulated in the area where the respondent no. 6, a resident of Indore, Madhya Pradesh, resides, the applicant has taken steps in the substituted manner and the notice was published in the daily newspaper, “Dainik Bhaskar”, in its Indore edition on 16.10.2019. It is submitted by Mr. Parasar, that the said newspaper is a widely circulated one and accordingly, an affidavit to that effect enclosing the copy of the newspaper has been submitted.
I have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant and also perused the contents of the affidavit including the copy of the newspaper annexed therein. Having perused the same, I am of the opinion that service of notice on respondent no. 6 is
Page No.# 5/6
deemed to be duly served.
This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been preferred seeking condonation of delay of 154 days in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment and award dated 05.08.2016 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal no. 1, Kamrup, Guwahati (“the Tribunal”, in short) in MAC Case No. 1894/2011, whereby, the learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 21,20,000/- along with interest of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application in favour of the respondent nos. 1 – 4/claimants and by apportioning the said awarded amount, the present applicant has been saddled with the liability to satisfy 50% of the said awarded amount.
I have perused the averments made in the application. It is averred that the Department was not aware about that passing of the judgment and award in time as they were not informed by the learned counsel who appeared for them before the learned Tribunal and the applicant Department came to know about the same only when the Department was served with a copy of the impugned judgment and award by the claimant on 15.12.2016. Thereafter, some time occurred to take a decision about preferring the appeal and ultimately, after collecting the certified copies of all the documents including the claim application and the written statement, the appeal could be filed only on 07.04.2017 and in the process, the delay of 154 days had occurred.
Mr. Agarwala and Ms. Borthakur, learned counsel appearing for the respondents have expressed no objection in condoning the delay and have submitted that the appeal may be heard on merit.
Upon perusal of the averments made in the application and hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant has provided sufficient explanation showing sufficient cause for condoning the period of delay, as indicated above, and accordingly, the period of 154 days in preferring the connected appeal stands condoned.
Registry to list the connected appeal for admission.
This I.A. is, accordingly, disposed of.
Page No.# 6/6
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 154 days in filing the appeal is condonable under Section 5 of the Limitation Act due to lack of departmental knowledge and unavoidable circumstances?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India
Smti Rashmi Rabha
Manish Choudhury
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
