High Court allowed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with proviso to Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, condoning a 94-day delay in filing a MAC Appeal accepted reasons for the delay.
Cided that the delay of 94 days in filing the MAC Appeal is condoned.
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.# 1/3
GAHC010177732020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2083/2020
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT 24 WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI.
VERSUS
KANIKA BRAHMA AND 5 ORS. W/O- LATE DILIP BRAHMA, R/O- VILL.- BELGURI, AMBARI, P.S. MUSHALPUR, DIST.- BAKSA (BTAD), ASSAM, PIN- 783334.
2:DONALDIN BRAHMA S/O- LATE DILIP BRAHMA R/O- VILL.- BELGURI AMBARI P.S. MUSHALPUR DIST.- BAKSA (BTAD) ASSAM PIN- 783334. 3:PRUDENCE BRAHMA S/O- LATE DILIP BRAHMA R/O- VILL.- BELGURI AMBARI P.S. MUSHALPUR DIST.- BAKSA (BTAD) ASSAM PIN- 783334. 4:SRIMATI DAMAYANTI BRAHMA D/O- LATE DILIP BRAHMA R/O- VILL.- BELGURI AMBARI P.S. MUSHALPUR
Page No.# 2/3
DIST.- BAKSA (BTAD) ASSAM PIN- 783334. (RESPONDENT NOS. 2 3 AND 4 BEING MINORS ARE REP. BY THEIR LEGAL GUARDIAN MOTHER RESPONDENT NO. 1). 5:SMTI KANAN SAHA W/O- NIRMAL SAHA R/O- VILLAGE WARD NO. 3 MANGALDOI TOWN P.S. MANGALDOI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM PIN- 783129. (OWNER OF THE BUS NO. AS-13/C-2881). 6:NANDESWAR NATH S/O- SRI RUPARAM NATH R/O- VILL.- PUB DEONA GAON P.O. RAMURI P.S. MANGALDOI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM PIN- 784125. (DRIVER OF THE BUS NO. AS-13/C-2881)
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI Advocate for the Respondent : MR D MONDAL
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG
ORDER
28.04.2022
Heard Mr. R Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant also heard Mr. D Mondal, learned counsel for the opposite party.
This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with proviso to Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 is filed for condonation of delay of 94 days in filing the MAC Appeal.
Mr. D Mondal, learned counsel for the respondent has not raised any objection.
Page No.# 3/3
Learned counsel for the petitioner summits that the delay of 94 days has been explained in paragraph No. 2 of the application which basically states that the delay is due to the time taken for seeking legal opinion from the Income Tax Department and the Regional Office.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for both sides, this Court is of the opinion that the reasons shown for delay is acceptable and find it fit to condone the delay.
Accordingly, the delay of 94 in filing the MAC Appeal is hereby condoned.
I.A.(Civil) 2033/2020 thus stands allowed and disposed of.
Registry to register the connected MAC Appeal and list the same for admission on 06.05.2022.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 94 days in filing the MAC Appeal should be condoned.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
Marli Vankung
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
