Allowed

Smti. Samita Kami v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC2 Dec 2020I.A.(Civil)/3583/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court, on an interim application, allowed the condonation of a 407-day delay in filing a writ appeal by the wife of the original petitioner. The court accepted the explanation regarding lack of information from the deceased husband's counsel and her residence in another state.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 407 days delay in filing writ appeal and direction to register and list the appeal.

Smti. Samita Kami Vs the Union of India and 4… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010272572019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3583/2019

¶5

SMTI. SAMITA KAMI

¶6

W/O- LATE BEG BAHADUR KAMI, R/O- VILL.- YANGTHANG, P.O., P.S. AND DIST.- GAYZING, SIKKIM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SAHASTRA SEEMA BAL (SSB), OFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT, 15TH BN SSB, BONGAIGAON, P.O. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM.

¶10

2:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL

¶11

3:THE COMMANDANT

¶12

15TH BN SB

¶13

4:THE DEPUTY COMMANDANT 15TH BN SSB

¶14

5:THE ASSISTANT COMMANDANT/ADJUSTAN

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶17

Linked Case :

¶18

SMTI SAMITA KAMI Address:

¶19

Page No.# 2/4

¶20

VERSUS

¶21

THE UNION OF INDIA and 4 ORS Address: 2:THE DIST. and SESSIONS JUDGE Address:OFFICE OF THE DIST.and SESSIONS JUDGE AGARTALA WEST TRIPURA

¶22

3:THE DIST and SESSIONS JUDGE

¶23

Address:OFFICE OF THE DIST. and SESSIONS JUDGE UDAIPUR SOUTH TRIPURA.

¶24

4:THE DIST.and SESSIONS JUDGE

¶25

Address:OFFICE OF THE DIST. and SESSIONS JUDGE KAILASAHAR NORTH TRIPURA.

¶26

5:THE LD. REGISTRAR

¶27

Address:GAUHATI HIGH COURT AGARTALA BENCH AGARTALA WEST TRIPURA.

¶28

6:SHRI HIMANGSHU CHANDA

¶29

Address:PRIVATE SECY-II OFFICE OF THE DIST.and SESS.JUDGE AGARTALA WEST TRIPURA. -----------Advocate for : MR.P K R CHOUDHURY Advocate for : appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA and 4 ORS: Advocate ,

, , ,

, appearing for 2,

Page No.# 3/4

6, respectively.

BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶38

ORDER

¶39

02.12.2020:

¶40

{N. Kotiswar Singh, CJ (Acting)}

¶41

Heard Mr. P. K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondents.

¶42

The present application is filed for condoning the delay of 407 days in filing the writ appeal against judgment and order dated 19.11.2013, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.2893/2007, which was filed by the husband of the applicant.

¶43

The grounds for delay in filing the appeal have been mentioned in paragraph Nos.2, 3 and 4 of the application. Briefly, the reason assigned is that the applicant came to know about the passing of impugned judgment and order after she came to Guwahati to enquire about the status of the writ petition filed by her deceased husband after the death of her husband and it was not in her knowledge that the writ petition was already dismissed by the Court. Thereafter as advised by the counsel, she obtained the death certificate of her husband to pursue the cause of her husband and in the process, delay of 407 days has taken place.

¶44

The respondents have filed objection contesting this application for condonation of delay. Though, an endeavour has been made to project that the writ appeal filed by the appellant is devoid of merit by going into the merit of the case, however, as regards the grounds furnished by the applicant justifying the delay, the written objection merely states that the deponent does not offer any comment for want of

¶45

Page No.# 4/4

¶46

knowledge as regards the averments made by the applicant in paragraph Nos.2, 3 and 4 of the application and the general submission is that the averments are vehemently denied.

¶47

Accordingly, considering the pleadings and also the grounds taken that the delay occurred on account of lack of information from the counsel of her late husband of the dismissal of the petition and also the fact that the applicant hails from another State, i.e. from the State of Sikkim, we are satisfied with the reason assigned justifying the delay in filing the appeal.

¶48

Accordingly, I.A. is allowed condoning the delay of 407 days in filing the writ appeal.

¶49

Registry is directed to register and number the appeal and list it accordingly.

¶50

This I.A. stands disposed of accordingly.

¶51

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

¶52

Comparing Assistant

Smti. Samita Kami v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti. Samita Kami v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ram Prasad Dutta Vs Smti. Sonali Dutta

Rajesh Kesarwani, Idse Vs Mes No. 300294 Sri Amit Kumar Mittal, and 3 Ors.

Khursidul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Rinchin Tashi and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Arunachal Pradesh and 5 Ors.

Smti. Manalisha Bezbaruah Vs Sri Biju Bezbarooah

Madhab Rajbongshi Vs Prodyut Kumar Bora and 12 Ors.